Considering the governance suitability of Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) from the whitepaper and BIP-119.

Bitcoin Improvement Proposals, BIP, is a crucial foundation for the upgrade of the Bitcoin network. All major hard forks need to go through this process. However, surprisingly, Taproot Assets are not included in this, and why did the founder of BIP-119 decide to delete his own code recently?

Deleted Bitcoin Improvement Proposal Code Repository

Last week, Bitcoin developer Jeremy Rubin deleted the code for his proposed BIP-119 in the BIP Github repository as a protest against the BIP governance process.

Background: Introduction to BIP-119

BIP-119, proposed by Rubin in 2022, aims to introduce a new opcode called CheckTemplateVerify (CTV) to enable the Bitcoin network to implement a state known as on-chain covenants, expecting to construct more advanced applications by providing a modular system in conjunction with other tools.

On the other hand, Rubin hoped to quickly implement BIP-119 by bypassing rigorous review processes.

However, Rubin was questioned by many Bitcoin core developers at the time. Other proposals offering similar functionalities or possibly better effects were available during the same period, and rapid deployment could pose significant security risks. There was also suspicion of self-interest, as a company founded by Rubin at the time could gain advantages from the proposal. Ultimately, the proposal did not pass.

Rubin Deletes BIP-119 Code

Two years later, with BIP-119 still not implemented, Rubin removed his code from the BIP Github last week, stating, "The BIP repository is no longer a suitable place for such documents. If BIP is actively managed again in the future, I may consider adding it back."

Rubin mentioned that proposals like CAT, CSFS, Taproot Assets, and Ordinals, among others, were not assigned BIP numbers, and their drafts were not indexed in the BIP repository, so CTV was unnecessary.

Will Taproot Assets bring more secure and faster token applications to the Bitcoin ecosystem?

This action once again faced criticism from the Bitcoin developer community, believing that no one should delete BIP codes. The appropriate approach would be to adjust the tags to archived or suspended status.

Epitaph Not in Bitcoin Improvement Proposal Code Repository

Since January of this year, due to the exit of relevant personnel, only Luke Dashjr remains responsible for reviewing and approving BIPs, the same developer who rejected Casey Rodarmor's proposal for Ordinals at that time.

Therefore, community members have raised objections, stating that the Bitcoin ecosystem development process should be more decentralized, and the judgment on BIP reviews should not be made by a single individual.

Revisiting the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal Code Repository

From the governance events of two recent Bitcoin Improvement Proposals, it is evident that while the Bitcoin ecosystem emphasizes decentralization, it still possesses a unique governance environment and culture. Despite ongoing debates, discussions filled with diverse opinions remain invaluable.

Regardless of the outcome of CTV or how Epitaph interacts with Bitcoin developers, these events have successfully prompted the community to reconsider the legitimacy of the governance process of the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal Code Repository.