Keep LIP status consistent (README index ↔ frontmatter ↔ on-chain)
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- No language data
- Stars
- 8
- Forks
- 20
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
## Problem
A LIP's status is recorded in two hand-edited places that drift apart:
1. The `status:` field in each `LIPs/LIP-N.md` frontmatter.
2. The status column in the README index table.
When one is updated and the other is forgotten, the documented status becomes wrong. This recently caused downstream tooling (e.g. delegators querying LIP status using AI tools) to report incorrect states. #108 is a concrete example: it updates LIP-101 to **Final** in the README but leaves the frontmatter at **Proposed**.
A snapshot today shows 6 LIPs internally inconsistent (89–92, 100, 101) plus trailing-whitespace in two `status:` values (LIP-3, LIP-15).
## Plan
- [ ] **Fix current inconsistencies** — reconcile README + frontmatter for the affected LIPs so the repo is internally consistent.
- [ ] **Status consistency CI gate** — a check on every PR/push that fails when any LIP's README status and frontmatter status disagree (would have caught #108). Full-repo check, no new toolchain.
- [ ] **Weekly on-chain reconciliation** — a scheduled job that compares documented status against real LIP-16 governance poll outcomes (via the Livepeer Arbitrum subgraph + IPFS proposal linkage) and opens a ready-to-merge PR when a `Proposed` LIP's poll has concluded, or a `Draft`/`Last Call` LIP has an active poll. Editorially gated (never auto-merges).
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by comparing the README index status column with the `status:` frontmatter in `LIPs/LIP-N.md` for the affected LIPs, including 89–92, 100, 101, 3, and 15. Then review the repository’s existing CI and scheduled-job entry points before defining the consistency and on-chain reconciliation checks. Done means the current discrepancies are fixed and the planned checks can detect and report future mismatches without auto-merging.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- blockchain, ci-cd, documentation
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100