A suggestion was brought forward about the potential benefits of archiving the current BIPs repository in favor of allowing individuals to maintain distinct repositories for BIPs. This approach is argued to possibly offer a more decentralized and flexible management system for handling proposals.

Despite the proposition for decentralization, there remains a consensus on the relevance of maintaining a unified repository for BIPs. This stance underscores the importance of having a centralized point of reference for BIPs, which facilitates easier access and review by the broader community. However, concerns were raised about the governance and editorial control over such a centralized repository. Specifically, it was suggested that the roles of mailing list moderators and BIP editors should not overlap. The reasoning behind this is to ensure a separation of powers that can help prevent conflicts of interest and promote impartiality in the management of BIPs.

To address these concerns, two individuals were recommended for consideration as suitable candidates for the role of BIP editors. These recommendations emphasize the community’s effort to maintain a structured yet flexible approach to managing Bitcoin’s evolution through improvement proposals. By carefully selecting individuals who are seen as capable and unbiased, the community aims to uphold the integrity and effectiveness of the BIP process.

These discussions reflect the ongoing efforts within the Bitcoin community to balance between centralization for coherence and efficiency, and decentralization for inclusiveness and flexibility. The dialogue underscores the importance of governance structures that align with the ethos of the cryptocurrency while ensuring its orderly development.