On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 at 21:57, Olaoluwa Osuntokun <laol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Also note that lnd has _never_ referred to itself as the "reference" > implementation. A few years ago some other implementations adopted that > title themselves, but have since adopted softer language.
I don't remember that but if you're referring to c-lightning it was the first lightning implementation, and the only one for a while, so in a way it was a "reference" at the time ? Or it could have been a reference to their policy of "implementing the spec, all the spec and nothing but the spec" ? > I think it's worth briefly revisiting a bit of history here w.r.t the github > org in question. In the beginning, the lightningnetwork github org was > created by Joseph, and the lightningnetwork/paper repo was added, the > manuscript that kicked off this entire thing. Later lightningnetwork/lnd was > created where we started to work on an initial implementation (before the > BOLTs in their current form existed), and we were added as owners. > Eventually we (devs of current impls) all met up in Milan and decided to > converge on a single specification, thus we added the BOLTs to the same > repo, despite it being used for lnd and knowingly so. Yes, work on c-lightning then eclair then lnd all began a long time before the BOLTs process was implemented, and we all set up repos, accounts... I agree that we all inherited things from the "pre-BOLTS" era and changing them will create some friction but I still believe it should be done. You also mentioned potential admin rights issues on the current specs repos which would be solved by moving them to a new clean repo. > As it seems the primary grievance here is collocating an implementation of > Lightning along with the _specification_ of the protocol, and given that the > spec was added last, how about we move the spec to an independent repo owned > by the community? I currently have github.com/lightning, and would be happy > to donate it to the community, or we could create a new org like > "lightning-specs" or something similar. Sounds great! github.com/lightning is nice (and I like Damian's idea of using github.com/lightning/bolts) and seems to please everyone so it looks that we have a plan! Fabrice _______________________________________________ Lightning-dev mailing list Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev