Skip to content

fix: eip validator#6

Merged
jrudolf merged 7 commits intojrudolf:masterfrom
euler0x:fix/eip-validator
Jul 9, 2025
Merged

fix: eip validator#6
jrudolf merged 7 commits intojrudolf:masterfrom
euler0x:fix/eip-validator

Conversation

@euler0x
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@euler0x euler0x commented Jul 7, 2025

When opening a pull request to submit a new EIP, please use the suggested template: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/eip-template.md

We have a GitHub bot that automatically merges some PRs. It will merge yours immediately if certain criteria are met:

  • The PR edits only existing draft PRs.
  • The build passes.
  • Your GitHub username or email address is listed in the 'author' header of all affected PRs, inside .
  • If matching on email address, the email address is the one publicly listed on your GitHub profile.

ERCS/erc-7828.md Outdated
[ERC-7785]: ./ERC-7785.md
[ERC-2304]: ./ERC-2304.md
[ERC-2304]: ./eip-2304.md
[SLIP44]: https://github.com/satoshilabs/slips/blob/master/slip-0044.md
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are we sure SLIP are also getting referenced?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[ERC-7930]: ./ERC-7930.md
[ERC-7785]: ./ERC-7785.md
[ERC-2304]: ./ERC-2304.md
[ERC-2304]: ./eip-2304.md
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Double check if EIP or ERC is the convention for link references (aside from broken bot)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

solved on 8ca4a30

after sam's last commit there is no doubt
ethereum@a062598


- Using ENS as the only resolving method means it's enough to use the same Interoperable Addresses v1 for this standard, without extending it to also store the name resolver used. This means however that wallets are free to show users both resolved and unresolved (raw) Interoperable Names.

<!--
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Did open discussion got deleted or moved?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sam suggested commenting on it with the proposal that when the ERC is productive this section should not be read directly to avoid possible problems, since commenting on it adds an error with the bot, I decided to delete it.

@jrudolf jrudolf merged commit 99b3975 into jrudolf:master Jul 9, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants