• © Goverland Inc. 2026
  • v1.0.5
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
PushPushby0x1c8c125C1Eac1C8d450979cbf0146985D75df55A0x1c8c…f55A

PIP-10: Naming convention & acronyms adjustments to differentiate EPNS Protocol Improvements from Push Governance Improvements

Voting ended over 3 years agoSucceeded

Link to Draft Proposal, Forum Discussion

Background

This proposal aims to add more specificity to the acronyms and naming conventions used for EPNS Protocol Improvement Proposals, against the PUSH Governance-specific proposals.

The goal is to use PIP for Push Protocol Improvement Proposals, and PGIP for Push Governance Improvement Proposals

Proposal Description

At present, PIPs or Push Improvement Proposals are mainly used to refer to proposals on governance. As we grow closer to making EPNS a DAO, it becomes imperative to involve the community in technical decisions.

The web3 developer community is very familiar with the Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs). So following similar standards, it is proposed to use Push Improvement Proposals (PIPs) to describe the technical standards/improvements of the EPNS protocol.

Proposals on the Governance side will then take on a new name of PGIP i.e, Push Governance Improvement Proposal.

Conclusion

If this proposal gets ratified PIPs will be used to describe technical standards/improvements and PGIPs will be the go-to place for Governance proposals.

Off-Chain Vote

FOR
1.12M PUSH66.4%
AGAINST
567.97K PUSH33.6%
Download mobile app to vote

Discussion

PushPIP-10: Naming convention & acronyms adjustments to differentiate EPNS Protocol Improvements from Push Governance Improvements

Timeline

Aug 18, 2022Proposal created
Aug 18, 2022Proposal vote started
Aug 21, 2022Proposal vote ended
Oct 26, 2023Proposal updated