Skip to content

Conversation

VolodymyrBg
Copy link
Contributor

  • Change RFC 8170 to RFC 8174 in the Specification section comment
  • Aligns template with EIP-1 specification and existing EIP documents
  • RFC 8174 is the correct standard for terminology alongside RFC 2119
  • All existing EIPs use RFC 8174, making this consistent with the codebase

@VolodymyrBg VolodymyrBg requested a review from eth-bot as a code owner August 29, 2025 16:19
@github-actions github-actions bot added c-update Modifies an existing proposal s-draft This EIP is a Draft t-process labels Aug 29, 2025
@eth-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

eth-bot commented Aug 29, 2025

🛑 eip-review-bot failed for an unknown reason. Please see logs for more details, and report this issue at the eip-review-bot repository.

@eth-bot eth-bot added the e-consensus Waiting on editor consensus label Aug 29, 2025
@g11tech
Copy link
Contributor

g11tech commented Sep 5, 2025

will let @SamWilsn take a call on this

@SamWilsn SamWilsn merged commit 8c8d5f2 into ethereum:master Sep 9, 2025
10 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
c-update Modifies an existing proposal e-consensus Waiting on editor consensus s-draft This EIP is a Draft t-process
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants