From 3d07d12de536166bbd32e86f9d24671be5610ad3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 14:53:26 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 01/12] Revert "BIP3: add guidance on originality, quality, LLMs" This reverts commit d083ce5a9b9d96bbbedec94a3c7878df11edd085. --- bip-0003.md | 9 +++------ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index b1d4440a..06377b61 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -37,10 +37,7 @@ Some BIPs describe processes, implementation guidelines, best practices, inciden the Bitcoin protocol, peer-to-peer network, and client software may be acceptable. BIPs are intended to be a means for proposing new protocol features, coordinating client standards, and -documenting design decisions that have gone into implementations. A BIP may be submitted by anyone, -provided it is the original work of its authors and the content is of high quality, e.g. does not waste -the community's time. No content may be generated by AI/LLMs and authors must proactively disclose -up-front any use of AI/LLMs. +documenting design decisions that have gone into implementations. BIPs may be submitted by anyone. The scope of the BIPs repository is limited to BIPs that do not oppose the fundamental principle that Bitcoin constitutes a peer-to-peer @@ -481,7 +478,7 @@ repository](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips) where it may get further feedback. For each new BIP pull request that comes in, an editor checks the following: -* The idea has been previously proposed by one of the authors to the Bitcoin Development Mailing List and discussed there +* The idea has been previously discussed on the Bitcoin Development Mailing List * The described idea is on-topic for the repository * Title accurately describes the content * Proposal is of general interest and/or pertains to more than one Bitcoin project/implementation @@ -490,7 +487,7 @@ For each new BIP pull request that comes in, an editor checks the following: * Motivation, Rationale, and Backward Compatibility have been addressed * Specification provides sufficient detail for implementation * The defined Layer header must be correctly assigned for the given specification -* The BIP is ready: it is comprehensible, technically feasible and sound, and all aspects are addressed as necessary +* The BIP is ready: it is comprehensible, technically feasible, and all aspects are addressed as necessary Editors do NOT evaluate whether the proposal is likely to be adopted. From 56ac1c26867fe409f393b27e5d68d48e68e5a89d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 15:05:29 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 02/12] bip3: Broaden reference implementation formats MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Based on Luke Dashjr’s b46e8195914fc3479760fef4c443390c01825e63 --- bip-0003.md | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index 06377b61..9f029b64 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -100,7 +100,9 @@ following list and address each as appropriate. implementers and users should deal with these incompatibilities. * Reference Implementation — Where applicable, a reference implementation, test vectors, and documentation must be finished before the BIP can be given the status "Complete". Test vectors must be provided in the BIP or - as auxiliary files (see [Auxiliary Files](#auxiliary-files)) under an acceptable license. The reference implementation can be provided in the BIP, as an auxiliary file, or per reference to a pull request that is expected to remain available permanently. + as auxiliary files (see [Auxiliary Files](#auxiliary-files)) under an acceptable license. The reference implementation + can be provided in the BIP, as an auxiliary file, or per linking another code reference that is expected to remain + available permanently such as a pull request, a dedicated branch, a new repository, or similar. * Changelog — A section to track modifications to a BIP after reaching Complete status. * Copyright — The BIP must be placed under an acceptable license (see [BIP Licensing](#bip-licensing) below). From 6f62034db8150a0b5ae6b407127f70a84b7bd056 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 15:18:11 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 03/12] bip3: Clarify editor assignment of BIP numbers Adopted from: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/2037/commits/a399d0791d173510badd3cbf954be547c3d347e4k Co-authored-by: luke+github_public@dashjr.org --- bip-0003.md | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index 9f029b64..7ffa5446 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -230,7 +230,8 @@ specification above. After fleshing out the proposal further and ensuring that it is of high quality and properly formatted, the authors should open a pull request to the [BIPs repository](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips). The document must adhere to the formatting requirements specified above and should be provided as a file named with a working title of the form -"bip-title.[md|mediawiki]". The authors must not self-assign a number to their proposal. +"bip-title.[md|mediawiki]". Only BIP Editors may assign BIP numbers. Until one has done so, authors should refer to their +BIP by name only. BIPs that (1) adhere to the formatting requirements, (2) are on-topic, and (3) have materially progressed beyond the ideation phase, e.g., by generating substantial public discussion and commentary from diverse contributors, by From 25810a0a4aaf5cf82261b1b16dcc49911c101cec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 15:24:38 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 04/12] bip3: Avoid implying BIP editors must reply to every ML post Co-authored-by: Luke Dashjr --- bip-0003.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index 7ffa5446..37823544 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -463,7 +463,7 @@ The current BIP Editors are: The BIP Editors subscribe to the Bitcoin Development Mailing List and watch the [BIPs repository](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips). -When either a new BIP idea or an early draft is submitted to the mailing list, BIP Editors and other community members should comment in regard +When either a new BIP idea or an early draft is submitted to the mailing list, BIP Editors or other community members should comment in regard to: * Novelty of the idea From e44d11ebb9894f8023b7551ab8ca2edb56689830 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 15:30:46 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 05/12] bip3: Clarify that draft needs to be discussed on ML --- bip-0003.md | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index 37823544..7c25a787 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -481,8 +481,9 @@ repository](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips) where it may get further feedback. For each new BIP pull request that comes in, an editor checks the following: -* The idea has been previously discussed on the Bitcoin Development Mailing List +* The idea has been previously proposed to the Bitcoin Development Mailing List and discussed there * The described idea is on-topic for the repository +* A draft of the BIP by one of the authors has been previously discussed on the Bitcoin Development Mailing List * Title accurately describes the content * Proposal is of general interest and/or pertains to more than one Bitcoin project/implementation * Document is properly formatted From 86d9737e41bd43de03adc2a118ece13a0bf761ae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Luke Dashjr Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2025 21:07:56 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 06/12] bip-0003: Move Type header responsibility to the author(s) --- bip-0003.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index 7c25a787..059aff83 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -490,14 +490,14 @@ For each new BIP pull request that comes in, an editor checks the following: * Licensing terms are acceptable * Motivation, Rationale, and Backward Compatibility have been addressed * Specification provides sufficient detail for implementation -* The defined Layer header must be correctly assigned for the given specification +* The defined Layer and Type headers must be correctly assigned for the given specification * The BIP is ready: it is comprehensible, technically feasible, and all aspects are addressed as necessary Editors do NOT evaluate whether the proposal is likely to be adopted. Then, a BIP Editor will: -* Assign a BIP number and BIP type in the pull request +* Assign a BIP number in the pull request * Ensure that the BIP is listed in the [README](README.mediawiki) * Merge the pull request when it is ready From 5fd416237891e986c3ff12ab2b84a17d15d510dd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Luke Dashjr Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2025 21:12:38 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 07/12] bip-0003: Changes from BIP 2: Make it match actual spec --- bip-0003.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index 059aff83..dffefa97 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -523,7 +523,7 @@ mentioned in the [Changelog](#changelog) section. - The comment system is abolished.[^comments] - A BIP in Draft or Complete status may no longer be closed solely on grounds of not making progress for three years.[^rejection] - A BIP in Draft status may be updated to Closed status if it appears to have stopped making progress for at least a - year and its authors do not assert within four weeks of being contacted that they are still working on it. + year and its authors do not assert within four weeks of being contacted that they intend to continue working on it. - Complete BIPs can only be moved to Closed by its authors and may remain in Complete indefinitely. - A Changelog section is introduced to track significant changes to BIPs after they have reached the Complete status. - Process BIPs are living documents that do not ossify and may be modified indefinitely. From f29514f21c0345f1166eefb596927a124c80e119 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 15:36:58 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 08/12] bip3: Fix capitalization and drop footnote --- bip-0003.md | 7 ++----- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index dffefa97..af31a5e5 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ BIP types more clearly, and generalizes the BIP process to fit the community ### What is a BIP? -BIPs are improvement proposals for Bitcoin[^capitalization]. The main topic is information and technologies that support and expand the utility of the bitcoin +BIPs are improvement proposals for Bitcoin. The main topic is information and technologies that support and expand the utility of the Bitcoin currency. Most BIPs provide a concise, self-contained, technical description of one new concept, feature, or standard. Some BIPs describe processes, implementation guidelines, best practices, incident reports (e.g., [BIP 50](bip-0050.mediawiki)), or other information relevant to the Bitcoin community. However, any topics related to @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ documenting design decisions that have gone into implementations. BIPs may be su The scope of the BIPs repository is limited to BIPs that do not oppose the fundamental principle that Bitcoin constitutes a peer-to-peer -electronic cash system for the bitcoin currency. +electronic cash system for the Bitcoin currency. ### BIP Ownership @@ -626,9 +626,6 @@ feedback, and helpful comments. has frequently led to confusion, with authors using the date of opening the pull request, the date they started writing their proposal, the date of number assignment (as prescribed), or various other dates. Aligning the name of the header and the text in the preamble template with the descriptions will reduce the confusion. -[^capitalization]: **When is Bitcoin capitalized and when is it lowercased?** - This document uses capitalized Bitcoin to refer to the system, network and abstract concept, and only uses lowercase - bitcoin to refer to units of the bitcoin currency. [^standard-track]: **Why was the Specification type introduced?** The definitions of Informational and Standards Track BIPs caused some confusion in the past. Due to Informational BIPs being described as optional, Standards Track BIPs were sometimes misunderstood to be generally recommended. From f389e9b1bbf289fe318ec086879c8eb63fa30a02 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 15:41:22 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 09/12] bip3: Avoid onus --- bip-0003.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index af31a5e5..9c87937e 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -639,13 +639,13 @@ feedback, and helpful comments. only a handful of contributors commenting at all. This led to many situations in which one or two comments ended up dominating the comment summary. While some of those comments may have been representative of broadly held opinions, it also overstated the importance of individual comments directly in the Preamble of BIPs. As collecting feedback in - this accessible fashion failed, the new process puts the onus back on the audience to make their own evaluation. + this accessible fashion failed, the new process puts the burden back on the audience to make their own evaluation. [^layer]: **Why is the layer header now permitted for other BIP types?** The layer header had already been used by many Informational BIPs, so the rule that it is only available to Standards Track BIPs is dropped. [^OtherImplementations]: **What is the issue with "Other Implementations" sections in BIPs?** In the past, some BIPs had "Other Implementations" sections that caused frequent change requests to existing BIPs. - This put an onus on the BIP authors, and frequently led to lingering pull requests due to the corresponding BIPs’ + This put a burden on the BIP authors and BIP Editors, and frequently led to lingering pull requests due to the corresponding BIPs’ authors no longer participating in the process. Many of these alternative implementations eventually became unmaintained or were low-quality to begin with. Therefore, "Other Implementations" sections are heavily discouraged. [^complete]: **Why was the Proposed status renamed to Complete?** From 41fe83f750b30cdf19ef6d8cda776049e7678da5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 16:28:25 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 10/12] bip3: Add and backfill Changelog section MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The Version header is omitted at this time, as it is not permitted under BIP 2. --- bip-0003.md | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index 9c87937e..966da728 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ appear in the following order. Headers marked with "\*" are optional. All other discussion threads on other platforms. Entries take the format "yyyy-mm-dd: URL", e.g., `2009-01-09: https://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@metzdowd.com/msg10142.html`, using the date and URL of the start of the conversation. Multiple discussions should be listed on separate lines. -* Version — The current version number of this BIP. See the [Changelog](#changelog) section below. +* Version — The current version number of this BIP. See the [Changelog](#changelog-section-and-version-header) section below. * Requires — A list of existing BIPs the new proposal depends on. If multiple BIPs are required, they should be listed in one line separated by a comma and space (e.g., "1, 2"). * Replaces[^proposes-to-replace] — BIP authors may put the numbers of one or more prior BIPs in the Replaces header to recommend that their @@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ if the prior attempt had been assigned a number, the new BIP will generally be a obvious that the new attempt directly continues work on the same idea, it may be reasonable to return the Closed BIP to Draft status. -### Changelog +### Changelog Section and Version Header To help implementers understand updates to a BIP, any changes after it has reached Complete must be tracked with version, date, and description in a Changelog section sorted by most recent version first. The version number is inspired by semantic versioning (MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH). @@ -599,6 +599,26 @@ The Superseded-By header is replaced with the Proposed-Replacement header in all Existing BIPs retain their license terms unchanged. The License and License-Code headers of BIPs are updated to express those terms using SPDX License Expressions. +## Changelog + +* __1.4.0__ (2025-12-09): + * Revert AI guidance, add Changelog section, broaden reference implementation formats, move Type header responsibility to authors, other editorial changes +* __1.3.1__ (2025-11-10): + * Reiterate that numbers are assigned by BIP Editors in pull requests +* __1.3.0__ (2025-10-22): + * Restrict use of AI/LLM tools, require original work. +* __1.2.1__ (2025-09-19): + * Clarify that idea should be discussed on dedicated mailing list thread +* __1.2.0__ (2025-09-19): + * Rename Created header to Assigned to clarify that it holds the date of number assignment +* __1.1.0__ (2025-07-18): + * Switch to SPDX License Expressions, drop License-Code header, and make editorial changes to BIP Licensing section. +* __1.0.1__ (2025-06-27): + * Improve description of acceptance, purpose of the BIPs repository, when Draft BIPs can be closed due to not + making progress, and make other minor improvements to phrasing. +* __1.0.0__ (2025-03-18): + * Complete planned work and move to Proposed. + ## Copyright This BIP is licensed under the [BSD-2-Clause License](https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause). Some content was From a9308f362efe246b9b64dce58716776752e3856e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2025 09:12:17 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 11/12] bip3: Require technical soundness Co-authored-by: jon@atack.com --- bip-0003.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index 966da728..b296b897 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -491,7 +491,7 @@ For each new BIP pull request that comes in, an editor checks the following: * Motivation, Rationale, and Backward Compatibility have been addressed * Specification provides sufficient detail for implementation * The defined Layer and Type headers must be correctly assigned for the given specification -* The BIP is ready: it is comprehensible, technically feasible, and all aspects are addressed as necessary +* The BIP is ready: it is comprehensible, technically feasible and sound, and all aspects are addressed as necessary Editors do NOT evaluate whether the proposal is likely to be adopted. From 897fa1b9dfd0eb77996144e83c1e1cc63a49bf6a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Murch Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2025 09:16:35 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 12/12] =?UTF-8?q?bip3:=20Do=20not=20waste=20community?= =?UTF-8?q?=E2=80=99s=20time?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Co-authored-by: jon@atack.com --- bip-0003.md | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/bip-0003.md b/bip-0003.md index b296b897..b4b26548 100644 --- a/bip-0003.md +++ b/bip-0003.md @@ -37,7 +37,8 @@ Some BIPs describe processes, implementation guidelines, best practices, inciden the Bitcoin protocol, peer-to-peer network, and client software may be acceptable. BIPs are intended to be a means for proposing new protocol features, coordinating client standards, and -documenting design decisions that have gone into implementations. BIPs may be submitted by anyone. +documenting design decisions that have gone into implementations. BIPs may be submitted by anyone, provided the +content is of high quality, e.g., does not waste the community’s time. The scope of the BIPs repository is limited to BIPs that do not oppose the fundamental principle that Bitcoin constitutes a peer-to-peer