Skip to content

bip388: Update Changelog #2144

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
murchandamus merged 2 commits into from
Apr 23, 2026
+7 −4
Merged

bip388: Update Changelog #2144

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
db131ef
bip388: Amend assignment date
murchandamus Apr 15, 2026
cfff971
bip388: Add missing Version header, rename Changelog
murchandamus Apr 15, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
11 changes: 7 additions & 4 deletions bip-0388.mediawiki
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,9 +5,10 @@
Authors: Salvatore Ingala <salvatoshi@protonmail.com>
Status: Complete
Type: Specification
Assigned: 2022-11-16
Assigned: 2023-12-26
License: BSD-2-Clause
Discussion: 2022-05-10: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-May/020423.html
Version: 1.1.0
</pre>

== Abstract ==
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -332,12 +333,14 @@ Wallet policies are implemented in
For development and testing purposes, we provide a [[bip-0388/wallet_policies.py|Python 3.7 reference implementation]] of simple classes to handle wallet policies, and the conversion to/from output script descriptors.
The reference implementation is for demonstration purposes only and not to be used in production environments.

== Change Log ==
== Changelog ==

* '''1.1.0''' (2024-11):
** Added support for <tt>musig</tt> key placeholders in descriptor templates.
* '''1.0.0''' (2024-05):
** Initial version.
* '''1.0.0''' (2024-05-12):
** Initial version, advance to Proposed (later updated to Complete per BIP3 adoption).
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@jonatack jonatack Apr 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See #2143 (comment) for a more explicit alternative for your consideration.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@murchandamus murchandamus Apr 21, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thinking about this again, I think it would be a lot of work and add unnecessary clutter to a lot of BIPs to mention the Status update due to BIP 3 adoption on every BIP. I propose that we only lazily mention it in Changelogs when we update them anyway and don’t put a separate line item for it.

I do still want to go through all the Closed BIPs to record the reasons they were closed as planned per BIP3.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@jonatack jonatack Apr 21, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense.

a lot of work and add unnecessary clutter

Toward the same goal, dropping versioning might be a good simplification for the reasons described in #2145 (comment).

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@murchandamus murchandamus Apr 21, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let’s stop having this conversation in four different places: #2145, #2143, #2144, and our chat. I already responded in #2145.

* '''0.0.1''' (2022-11-16):
** First draft.
Comment on lines +342 to +343
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@murchandamus murchandamus Apr 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@salvatoshi, if you prefer this to be presented differently, please let me know.


== Footnotes ==

Expand Down