Process: Activate BIP3 #1820

murchandamus · 2025-04-12T03:32:19Z

This is a first draft of applying the changes prescribed by BIP 3 in the section Updates to Existing BIPs should this BIP be Activated.

It also updates the CI-scripts to align with the new formatting.

Resolved:

@real-or-random’s proposal to update the Licensing scheme
Enforce order of headers in Preamble and fix order in BIPs that don’t conform

Planned for follow-up or parallel PRs:

Evaluate Informational BIPs regarding update to Specification type
BIPs that have had Draft status for extended periods will be moved to Complete or Deployed as applicable in collaboration with their authors.
The authors of incomplete Draft BIPs will be contacted to learn whether the BIPs are still in progress toward Complete, and will otherwise be updated to Closed as described in the Workflow section above.
Make changes or remove non-existent BIPs 40, 41, and 63 (breaks CI)

ACKs/concept ACKs

The following users have expressed support for activating BIP 3 here on this pull request:

Stale ACKs from before #2051

Useful links

bip-0001.mediawiki

murchandamus · 2025-04-14T21:03:54Z

I have updated the scripts/buildtable.pl in lock step with each of the changes so that the build script passes for every commit. The remaining tasks should probably be handled in follow-ups as they will take a variable amount of time.

murchandamus · 2025-06-20T22:46:32Z

Rebased on the latest version of #1819.

murchandamus

I can’t reproduce the scripts/diffcheck.sh error locally either with the latest commit of this branch, by bisecting, or after merging the latest upstream/master.
I’m thinking that the next step is to improve the script with a more helpful error message, but I’m not going to pursue that today.

ajtowns · 2025-07-01T05:42:54Z

You can reproduce the error message and get more info with:

$ git checkout 187d8859dce80c8433ff7466d012b5dd78ac3136   # master's parent commit (to avoid the conflict)
$ git merge 5e776c4c92d0a33c15311c7289139835132f2fec      # this PR
$ scripts/diffcheck.sh
...
$ diff -u -B5 /tmp/before.diff /tmp/after.diff
...

It's complaining that there are differences in the summaries of BIPs 40 ("Stratum wire protocol"), 41 ("Stratum mining protocol"), and 63 ("Stealth addresses"); which are all changing from "Standard" to "Specification", but only exist as assigned numbers, with no actual document in the repo. They're all more than a decade old based on git blame's output, so could probably just be removed from the README entirely (though doing that would also trigger the same set of errors).

ajtowns · 2025-07-01T06:39:17Z

I wonder if it would be worthwhile splitting the list of BIPs in the README by status. I've had a go at that in a gist here, including an update for the perl script: https://gist.github.com/ajtowns/5a8c504b6ef0e91437614be2840921d7#file-test-mediawiki (also changed the link text to be BIP-nnn instead of just nnn, to make searching for "bip-3" easier)

murchandamus · 2025-07-08T01:28:41Z

It's complaining that there are differences in the summaries of BIPs 40 ("Stratum wire protocol"), 41 ("Stratum mining protocol"), and 63 ("Stealth addresses");

Thanks for figuring that out. I was starting to doubt my sanity that evening. :)

They're all more than a decade old based on git blame's output, so could probably just be removed from the README entirely (though doing that would also trigger the same set of errors).

I guess I should remove or relabel them in a separate PR, then.

I wonder if it would be worthwhile splitting the list of BIPs in the README by status. I've had a go at that in a gist here, including an update for the perl script: https://gist.github.com/ajtowns/5a8c504b6ef0e91437614be2840921d7#file-test-mediawiki (also changed the link text to be BIP-nnn instead of just nnn, to make searching for "bip-3" easier)

I like the change to "BIP-nnn"; it looks nice. And sorting by status neatly highlights what’s deployed, but it not being sorted by numbers looks awfully strange to me—I have probably been staring at it too long that way. It might get some people motivated to update their BIPs to a more adequate status?

However, this Pr already has a lot going on, making me concerned that it will get review, I’m not sure I’d want to open up that can of worms in addition, especially being on the fence.

murchandamus · 2025-07-08T01:53:21Z

Thanks @ajtowns! It passes CI now.
@real-or-random, what do you think is the best course of action? It would probably make sense to first get the licensing update you propose in?

ajtowns · 2025-07-08T07:52:18Z

I wonder if it would be worthwhile splitting the list of BIPs in the README by status.

I like the change to "BIP-nnn"; it looks nice.

However, this Pr already has a lot going on,

I wasn't meaning to imply it should be part of this PR; my understanding was further improvements could still be made once BIP-3 was active.

murchandamus · 2025-07-08T14:39:01Z

Ah sorry, I misunderstood that. Yeah, afterwards sounds good to me, as the reordering of the README table would conflict with all of the changes here.

murchandamus · 2025-07-08T20:11:03Z

Cherry-picked the commit from #1891 to add support for the Version field to scripts/buildtable.pl, thanks @nothingmuch.

real-or-random · 2025-07-09T10:03:23Z

@real-or-random, what do you think is the best course of action? It would probably make sense to first get the licensing update you propose in?

See #1892.

Amend CI script to new statuses and update existing status field values in table and BIPs. ``` sed -z -i 's/Status: Proposed/Status: Complete/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Status: Proposed/Status: Complete/' bip-0*.mediawiki sed -i 's/| Proposed/| Complete/' README.mediawiki ```

``` sed -z -i 's/Status: Active/Status: Deployed/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Status: Active/Status: Deployed/' bip-0*.mediawiki sed -z -i 's/Status: Final/Status: Deployed/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Status: Final/Status: Deployed/' bip-0*.mediawiki sed -i 's/| Active/| Deployed/' README.mediawiki sed -i 's/| Final/| Deployed/' README.mediawiki ```

``` sed -z -i 's/Status: Deferred/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Status: Deferred/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.mediawiki sed -z -i 's/Status: Obsolete/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Status: Obsolete/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.mediawiki sed -z -i 's/Status: Rejected/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Status: Rejected/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.mediawiki sed -z -i 's/Status: Replaced/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Status: Replaced/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.mediawiki sed -z -i 's/Status: Withdrawn/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Status: Withdrawn/Status: Closed/' bip-0*.mediawiki ``` ``` sed -i 's/| Deferred/| Closed/' README.mediawiki sed -i 's/| Obsolete/| Closed/' README.mediawiki sed -i 's/| Rejected/| Closed/' README.mediawiki sed -i 's/| Replaced/| Closed/' README.mediawiki sed -i 's/| Withdrawn/| Closed/' README.mediawiki ```

sed -z -i 's/Superseded-By: /Proposed-Replacement: /' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Superseded-By: /Proposed-Replacement: /' bip-0*.mediawiki

``` sed -z -i 's/Type: Standards Track/Type: Specification/' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Type: Standards Track/Type: Specification/' bip-0*.mediawiki ``` After the scripted changes, the changes to BIP-40, BIP-41, and BIP-63 were undone, because it breaks CI. These three BIPs only exist conceptually and their proposal documents are missing which causes changes to them ot break the CI. I defer the changes to these BIPs to a separate pull request to get CI to pass.

Also line up with additional items in the lines below. ``` sed -i -z 's/ Post-History: / Discussion: /' bip-0*.md sed -i -z 's/ Post-History: / Discussion: /' bip-0*.mediawiki ```

``` sed -i '0,/Comments-Summary/{/Comments-Summary/d}' bip-0*md sed -i '0,/Comments-Summary/{/Comments-Summary/d}' bip-0*mediawiki sed -i '0,/Comments-URI/{/Comments-URI/d}' bip-0*md sed -i '0,/Comments-URI/{/Comments-URI/d}' bip-0*mediawiki ``` Then reset the BIPs with non-empty comment wikis: - bip-0037.mediawiki - bip-0038.mediawiki - bip-0039.mediawiki - bip-0042.mediawiki - bip-0044.mediawiki - bip-0047.mediawiki - bip-0049.mediawiki - bip-0060.mediawiki - bip-0061.mediawiki - bip-0074.mediawiki - bip-0075.mediawiki - bip-0077.md - bip-0084.mediawiki - bip-0090.mediawiki - bip-0118.mediawiki - bip-0125.mediawiki - bip-0150.mediawiki - bip-0151.mediawiki - bip-0152.mediawiki - bip-0171.mediawiki - bip-0172.mediawiki - bip-0173.mediawiki - bip-0174.mediawiki - bip-0176.mediawiki - bip-0178.mediawiki - bip-0199.mediawiki - bip-0322.mediawiki - bip-0340.mediawiki - bip-0341.mediawiki

``` sed -z -i 's/Author: /Authors: /' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Author: /Authors: /' bip-0*.mediawiki ``` Also align correctly in case of multiple authors.

BIP2 states that the Discussions-To header should only be used if the proposal was discussed somewhere else beside the Bitcoin Developer Mailing List. Therefore, the only use of the Discussions-To header in the repository is unnecessary and can be removed before the header is abolished.

``` sed -z -i 's/Created: /Assigned: /' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Created: /Assigned: /' bip-0*.mediawiki ```

The Copyright section specifies additional conditions, so the License header is not correct (or at least misleading). So let's just remove it. This is pragmatic because the field was only added as part of the activation of BIP 2 anyway, and there are other old BIPs with a License header.

See https://spdx.org/licenses/

Co-authored-by: Jon Atack <jon@atack.com>

murchandamus · 2025-12-16T01:02:09Z

This PR was updated to build on top of #2051. It cleanly rebased, since no BIPs had been published or had their statuses updated since the prior update of this PR on Oct 6.

I added one commit to backfill the omitted Version headers to the BIPs that were already using Changelogs with versioning, BIP 3, BIP 77, BIP 85, BIP 155, BIP 352, and BIP 374. BIP 1 and BIP 340 have Changelogs, but did not define versions, so no Version header was added.

…for BIPs that have a Changelog section that mentions a version. BIP 1 and BIP 340 have Changelog sections, but do not define versions.

ajtowns · 2025-12-16T05:45:47Z

ACK 6cce55c fwiw

real-or-random

ACK 6cce55c

polespinasa

Somehow I missed #2051 :/

ACK 6cce55c

murchandamus added Pending acceptance This BIP modification requires sign-off by the champion of the BIP being modified Process Trying to update process or stuck due to disagreement about Process labels Apr 12, 2025

murchandamus force-pushed the 2025-04-bip3-activation branch from 376ef0c to 4c67644 Compare April 12, 2025 03:34

jonatack reviewed Apr 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

bip-0001.mediawiki Show resolved Hide resolved

murchandamus force-pushed the 2025-04-bip3-activation branch 2 times, most recently from 9a0c662 to 11714c5 Compare April 14, 2025 21:02

murchandamus mentioned this pull request Jun 20, 2025

BIP3: Address additional review #1819

Merged

murchandamus force-pushed the 2025-04-bip3-activation branch from 8fc84aa to 19c86d0 Compare June 20, 2025 22:46

murchandamus force-pushed the 2025-04-bip3-activation branch 6 times, most recently from ec134fb to 5e776c4 Compare June 21, 2025 00:23

murchandamus commented Jun 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

murchandamus force-pushed the 2025-04-bip3-activation branch 2 times, most recently from f4dc0fa to 321e895 Compare July 8, 2025 01:50

murchandamus mentioned this pull request Jul 8, 2025

CI: Allow Version field in checks as per BIP 3 #1891

Closed

murchandamus mentioned this pull request Jul 8, 2025

BIP 77: Delimit fragment params with - instead of + #1890

Merged

nothingmuch mentioned this pull request Jul 10, 2025

Fix and enforce BIP 2 & 3 field ordering #1893

Closed

murchandamus and others added 22 commits December 15, 2025 16:29

process: Superseded-By ↦ Proposed-Replacement

5f2a615

sed -z -i 's/Superseded-By: /Proposed-Replacement: /' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Superseded-By: /Proposed-Replacement: /' bip-0*.mediawiki

BIP135: Move discussion to correct header

d9bc3f7

process: Post-History ↦ Discussion

0310d9e

Also line up with additional items in the lines below. ``` sed -i -z 's/ Post-History: / Discussion: /' bip-0*.md sed -i -z 's/ Post-History: / Discussion: /' bip-0*.mediawiki ```

process: Author ↦ Authors

89049ef

``` sed -z -i 's/Author: /Authors: /' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Author: /Authors: /' bip-0*.mediawiki ``` Also align correctly in case of multiple authors.

process: Allow Deputies header

1e9b5a8

process: Increase title limit

2d8b6e8

process: Update license check

210b49b

process: Drop unused Discussions-To Header

1d951ed

editor: Remove outdated comment from README table

af29a1e

Allow Version field in checks as per BIP 3

4801b35

process: Created ↦ Assigned

c553264

``` sed -z -i 's/Created: /Assigned: /' bip-0*.md sed -z -i 's/Created: /Assigned: /' bip-0*.mediawiki ```

Convert licenses to SPDX codes

e532469

bip2: Use correct SPDX license ids in the text

f36405c

See https://spdx.org/licenses/

process: Use "official" SPDX identifiers

89a2f32

See https://spdx.org/licenses/

process: Fix up license sections to match preamble

6064464

Co-authored-by: Jon Atack <jon@atack.com>

murchandamus force-pushed the 2025-04-bip3-activation branch 2 times, most recently from c0d0d33 to e93811e Compare December 16, 2025 00:58

process: Backfill missing Version headers

6cce55c

…for BIPs that have a Changelog section that mentions a version. BIP 1 and BIP 340 have Changelog sections, but do not define versions.

murchandamus force-pushed the 2025-04-bip3-activation branch from e93811e to 6cce55c Compare December 16, 2025 01:03

real-or-random approved these changes Dec 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

polespinasa approved these changes Dec 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

Process: Activate BIP3 #1820

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Process: Activate BIP3 #1820

Uh oh!

Conversation

murchandamus commented Apr 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

ACKs/concept ACKs

Stale ACKs from before #2051

Useful links

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Apr 14, 2025

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Jun 20, 2025

Uh oh!

murchandamus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ajtowns commented Jul 1, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ajtowns commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

ajtowns commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

real-or-random commented Jul 9, 2025

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Dec 16, 2025

Uh oh!

ajtowns commented Dec 16, 2025

Uh oh!

real-or-random left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

polespinasa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

13 participants

murchandamus commented Apr 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ajtowns commented Jul 1, 2025 •

edited

Loading