Call for Input: Update Author's Username in EIP-1193

[SamWilsn]

Call for Input

Decision	Do we merge https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/8290/files ?
If Affirmed	[EIP-1193](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1193)'s author list is updated.
If Rejected	No change.
Method	Rough Consensus
Deadline	April 7th, 2024

Background

@lightclient has verified the identity of the author. The old username has been re-registered by a different person.

[SamWilsn]

I am in favour of merging as long as the identity of the author is well verified.

[lightclient]

I am also in favor and have identified the individual.

[xinbenlv]

While I personally agree and want the individual to have the right to update their username despite EIP being final, wearing a EIP editor hat, it seems according to https://github.com/ethcatherders/EIPIP/issues/308 this case shall be rejected, which I personally disagree but it was a case we made as a group so we shall follow the same rationale.

I ask my fellow EIP editors who vote in favor to provide a rationale of how this is different from https://github.com/ethcatherders/EIPIP/issues/308 or we shall update our policy and revisit #308

For my part, @g11tech convinced me with this argument, roughly quoted:

EIPs aren't here to pump people's resumes. I can imagine someone bribing authors of a popular EIP to get authorship credit, and we don't want to be in the business of dealing with that.

I am against adding a new author.

One could argue that EIPs aren't seem to have any original purpose to collect airdrops, and whether we want to extend the EIP in the business of dealing with that, is doubtful.

[lightclient]

@xinbenlv this is different than #308 imo because we're changing the username of a listed author to be correct with their current username, rather than modifying the actual list of people.

[abcoathup]

I'm against (I don't have a vote). I'm generally against any changes to final EIPs. Airdrop farmers registering old names sucks, but that should be on projects doing airdrops to deal with.

Given projects have done airdrops for EIP authors, there is incentives for unauthorized changes to be requested. I wouldn't want EIP editors to be responsible for ensuring that these are valid changes. Far safer to not allow changes of final EIPs, and for EIPs in other states for only the current authors to change authors.

I strongly oppose any process which isn't repeatable by any author. Knowing an EIP editor shouldn't get you different/special treatment, than if you were a complete random. EIP editors shouldn't pick winners.

At the very least I would want a repeatable process. Ideally a combination of both:

• multiple authors of an EIP approve the GitHub name change
• GitHub evidence that the name was changed by the author themselves

https://github.com/marcgarreau/mist-wallet redirects to https://github.com/wolovim/mist-wallet but don't know if there is a better way to prove.

The GitHub documentation refers to the redirects for name changes: https://docs.github.com/en/account-and-profile/setting-up-and-managing-your-personal-account-on-github/managing-user-account-settings/changing-your-github-username#repository-references

[xinbenlv]

Thank you @lightclient for answering. I have no objection if our lines is drawn at "updating username for EIP is ok even when it's a final EIP".

Case 2: Here is a similar case: someone sent me an email claiming to be ERC-5855 co-author and ask to update the user name

I've replied and ask them to present their case here too for us to consider the rule

Case 3: https://github.com/ethereum/ERCs/pull/285/files

[xinbenlv]

Propose to repurpose this Call for Input as "Policy involving updating author's username in EIP/ERCs" considering the 3 cases:

1. For any authors who filed a PR to change their username in EIP/ERCs of final or any status allowing editing: if the lead author, individually, or a number of authors greater than half of the remaining authors, other than the requesting author, attested that the new username is the intended co-author by leaving a comment in the PR, the update to the username shall be considered legit.
2. Given sufficient attestants, any single EIP editor shall be able to approve and merge the PR.
3. Special case: if there is only one listed author, any EIP Editor could vouch for their identity, and another EIP Editor can merge the PR to update the username.

[bumblefudge]

s/legit/sufficiently authorized/*

[apan826]

I completely agree with the proposal raised by @xinbenlv. For a simple reason, we cannot accept that the name of a reward to me is not me. I think we need to have a way to update it. Thanks!

[lightclient]

I don't think we need more policies. There is enough work to do, we don't need arbitrary procedures for hypothetical issues holding us back.

[apan826]

I just think we need to have a way to update the wrong author name.

[lightclient]

We do, it's up to editor discretion.

[apan826]

O really? Is there a guide for it? Thanks!

lightclient @.***> 于2024年3月15日周五 20:15写道：

We do, it's up to editor discretion.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ethcatherders/EIPIP/issues/325#issuecomment-1999541924, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWO2VRK44QOHZ46XAYRXRN3YYLQ53AVCNFSM6AAAAABENVDT6CVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSOJZGU2DCOJSGQ . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.***>

[apan826]

We do, it's up to editor discretion.

Hi, @lightclient Can you let me know what does "editor discretion" mean? I really want to update the author name of my EIP... thanks!

[wolovim]

data point possibly worth highlighting: as it stands, whoever is the current owner of marcgarreau has the potential to abuse this amendment approval ability. in practice, i'd have faith in the remaining EIP authors and editors to police it.

thats all from me though. thanks to you who've put brain power into it. 🫡

[xinbenlv]

I support authors to have a way to update their Github handle or contact information. @apan826 do you have a PR?

[xinbenlv]

I strongly oppose any process which isn't repeatable by any author. Knowing an EIP editor shouldn't get you different/special treatment, than if you were a complete random. EIP editors shouldn't pick winners.

I share @abcoathup 's view.

I created a Call for Input: https://github.com/ethcatherders/EIPIP/issues/329

[apan826]

I support authors to have a way to update their Github handle or contact information. @apan826 do you have a PR?

Hi, @xinbenlv You mean the PR for updating my username in the author list of EIP5585? If yes, I did not create a PR yet, do I need to create one? Thanks.

[xinbenlv]

@apan826 Yes, please, and also have either your lead author approving it, or more than half of your other co-authors approve that PR as a way to validate the request, then I will go on to get it merged

[apan826]

Hi, @xinbenlv this is the PR created by our major author, thanks! https://github.com/ethereum/ERCs/pull/367

[g11tech]

its a terrible thing that other username has been registered by a different person, i am ok updating this but this is sort of a hassle we should avoid with some auto renaming or having a crypto identity (onchain or otherwise)

[SamWilsn]

General consensus is to affirm.

[apan826]

its a terrible thing that other username has been registered by a different person, i am ok updating this but this is sort of a hassle we should avoid with some auto renaming or having a crypto identity (onchain or otherwise)

Hi, @g11tech, it is a good point, I agree.

[apan826]

Hi, @xinbenlv @lightclient @SamWilsn @g11tech can we move to the link please and help to approve, https://github.com/ethereum/ERCs/pull/405 , exactly the same thing, sorry and many thanks.