bitcoin
Removed link and reference to SLIP-0173
SLIP-0173 is not relevant to BIP173 due to not containing any additional information about bitcoin.
It may be irrelevant to Bitcoin, but it redirects a common request about BIP-173, without needing any action from the BIP maintainer or others here.
The SLIPs have been a bulwark against countless altcoin PRs directed at this repository. See SLIP-044 for a prime example.
-Clark
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 09:08 Andrew Poelstra @.***> wrote:
It may be irrelevant to Bitcoin, but it redirects a common request about BIP-173, without needing any action from the BIP maintainer or others here.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1481#issuecomment-1646849234, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAL5OMIPSVTS2NX6GW3NOT3XRUV4BANCNFSM6AAAAAA2UJBDWA . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
@apoelstra @clarkmoody Thank you both for responding. It is my perspective that linking these projects may be perceived as an official endorsement for them. However, I can understand the desire to stop needless PRs. The question is, what is more important - preventing PRs or preventing users from being led astray?
I don't think it'd be perceived as an "official endorsement". Perhaps an "official acknowledgement", but that's fairly accurate -- if we were to add new HRPs in Bitcoin for something, we would check SLIP-173 to avoid colliding, because it's an easy check and it's good social grace.
It sounds to me that the BIP authors declined this proposed change to their BIP.
Oh oops, I got the impression that Andrew and Clark were the authors, but just realized that BIP173 is bech32 of course. Paging @sipa and @gmaxwell.
I’m closing this PR, because there doesn’t seem to be interest to merge it.