Skip to content

Update EIP-7870: add links to eip-4444 #9691

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

gap-editor
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@gap-editor gap-editor requested a review from eth-bot as a code owner April 24, 2025 19:23
@github-actions github-actions bot added c-update Modifies an existing proposal s-review This EIP is in Review t-informational labels Apr 24, 2025
@eth-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

eth-bot commented Apr 24, 2025

File EIPS/eip-7870.md

Requires 1 more reviewers from @asn-d6, @CarlBeek, @dankrad, @fredriksvantes, @jrudolf, @jsign, @jtraglia, @kevaundray, @nerolation, @parithosh

@eth-bot eth-bot added the a-review Waiting on author to review label Apr 24, 2025
@eth-bot eth-bot changed the title add links to eip-4444 Update EIP-7870: add links to eip-4444 Apr 24, 2025
Copy link

The commit d6be2bd (as a parent of e7bf1ec) contains errors.
Please inspect the Run Summary for details.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Apr 24, 2025
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ Node operators typically run both an **Execution Layer (EL)** client and a **Con
- Running a node involves frequent writes (e.g., database updates, logs). Ensure that the SSD’s Total Bytes Written (TBW) rating is sufficient for multi-year operation.
- **Capacity Considerations**
- As of January 2025, 2 TB can still work, but daily chain growth makes 4 TB more future-proof.
- While EIP-4444 aims to reduce historical storage requirements, the timeline for EIP-4444 remains uncertain.
- While [EIP-4444](./eip-4444.md) aims to reduce historical storage requirements, the timeline for [EIP-4444](./eip-4444.md) remains uncertain.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As you see in the linter, one cannot mention a draft EIP in an EIP that goes to Review.

proposal `eip-4444.md` is not stable enough for a `status` of `Review`

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
a-review Waiting on author to review c-update Modifies an existing proposal s-review This EIP is in Review t-informational w-ci Waiting on CI to pass
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants