[Bitcoin-development] BIP language on normative behavior

Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell at gmail.com
Mon Dec 19 22:29:34 UTC 2011

I've been arguing with Luke-JR on IRC about the interpenetration of
BIP_0014—  Gavin's recent commit uses the same version string for the
GUI interface and the daemon mode.

Luke believes this is a _violation_ of BIP_0014 and an error in
judgement on Gavin's part, and a failure to conform to the community
adopted standard. I believe Luke is mistaken: that BIP_0014 actually
don't have mandatory requirements for what you put in the version
field and even if it did, that they are in fact the same software and
should have the same name.

I don't think an agreement is likely on the second point, but the
first point highlights some ambiguity in the interpretation of BIP
language. E.g. What is permitted vs encouraged vs required.

There is well established standard language for this purpose:


I strongly recommend that all BIPs be written using the RFC2119
keywords where appropriate.

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list