The Ethereum ecosystem continues to mature, and with it, the processes that guide its development must evolve. In late October, EIP-7329: ERC/EIP Repository Split officially took effect — marking a pivotal moment in Ethereum’s governance structure. This change formally separates the ERC (Ethereum Request for Comments) repository from the EIP (Ethereum Improvement Proposals) repository, streamlining how protocol and application-layer upgrades are managed.
This structural shift isn't just technical housekeeping — it reflects deeper changes in how Ethereum’s decentralized community governs innovation. To unpack the implications, we explore the updated governance model, the roles within the EIP process, and how builders can better engage with this evolving system.
What Are EIPs and ERCs?
Before diving into the split, it's essential to understand what EIPs and ERCs are and how they differ.
An Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) is a design document proposing new features or processes for the Ethereum platform. These proposals go through rigorous review and community discussion before potential implementation. EIPs fall into three main categories:
- Core EIPs: Protocol-level changes affecting consensus rules (e.g., hard forks).
- Networking EIPs: Changes to peer-to-peer networking (e.g., wire protocols).
- Interface EIPs: Includes standards like APIs and contract interfaces — many of which become ERCs.
- Meta EIPs: Proposals about the development process itself.
Among interface EIPs, ERCs (Ethereum Request for Comments) have gained widespread recognition. They define application-level standards such as token contracts (ERC-20), NFTs (ERC-721), and account abstraction (ERC-4337). While all ERCs are technically EIPs, not all EIPs are ERCs.
👉 Discover how developers shape blockchain evolution through standardized proposals.
Why Separate ERCs from Core EIPs?
The EIP-7329 proposal introduced a formal separation between core protocol improvements and application-layer standards. The primary motivations include:
1. Improved Organization
With thousands of proposals over the years, the monolithic EIP repository became difficult to navigate. Separating ERCs into their own repository (ethereum/ercs) allows for clearer categorization and easier contribution workflows tailored to app-layer developers.
2. Decentralized Governance
Core protocol changes require deep cryptographic and systems engineering expertise, often involving Ethereum core developers and client teams. In contrast, ERCs are driven by application builders, dApp teams, and tooling developers who may not participate in consensus-layer discussions.
By splitting repositories, each community can govern its domain with more autonomy, using processes suited to its needs.
3. Faster Iteration for Application Standards
Application-layer innovation moves quickly. The ERC repository can now adopt lighter review processes, faster feedback loops, and experimental branches without risking stability in the core protocol pipeline.
For example, ERC-4804 (Web3 URL to EVM Call Message Translation) — a standard enabling human-readable web3 URLs — benefits from being developed outside the slower-moving core EIP process.
How Does This Affect Builders?
For developers building on Ethereum, this split means:
- Clearer contribution paths: App developers know where to submit standards.
- Better documentation and tooling: Dedicated tooling for ERC reviews, testing, and versioning is now feasible.
- Stronger community ownership: The ERC repo encourages stewardship by those most impacted — the builders themselves.
Bruce Xu, co-founder of LXDAO and project manager at EIP Fun, emphasizes that "the separation empowers application-layer innovators to take ownership of their standards without needing approval from core protocol gatekeepers."
Qi Zhou, founder of web3:// and EthStorage, adds: "This is a step toward true modular governance — where different layers evolve at their natural pace."
Roles in the EIP/ERC Ecosystem
Maintaining a healthy improvement process requires diverse participation. Key roles include:
1. Authors
Individuals or teams who draft proposals. They must clearly articulate motivation, design rationale, and backward compatibility considerations.
2. Reviewers
Volunteers who assess technical soundness, security implications, and alignment with Ethereum principles. Many reviewers are active client implementers or smart contract auditors.
3. Editors
Gatekeepers of the repository who manage pull requests, ensure formatting compliance, and guide proposals through stages (Draft → Last Call → Final).
4. Implementers
Developers who integrate finalized EIPs into execution clients (like Geth or Nethermind) or build tools supporting ERCs.
5. Community Advocates
Organizations like Ethereum Cat Herders, AllERCDevs, and EIP Fun help coordinate discussions, organize calls, and raise awareness about critical proposals.
👉 See how real-time collaboration shapes next-gen blockchain standards.
Challenges in Current Governance Processes
Despite progress, challenges remain:
Lack of Diversity in Core Decision-Making
Most core EIP decisions involve a small group of client developers and researchers. This creates centralization risks and limits perspectives — especially from Global South developers, women, and underrepresented groups.
Slow Feedback Loops
Some proposals languish for months due to lack of reviewer bandwidth or unclear next steps.
Insufficient Onboarding
New contributors often find the process intimidating. Resources like EIP-1: Purpose and Guidelines exist but aren’t always beginner-friendly.
Improvements being explored include mentorship programs, structured onboarding tracks, and rotating review committees to increase inclusivity.
The Future of Ethereum Governance
Looking ahead, several trends could reshape how Ethereum evolves:
- Modular Review Tracks: Separate workflows for core, networking, interface, and meta proposals.
- On-chain Feedback Mechanisms: Using quadratic voting or reputation systems to gauge community sentiment.
- Formal Verification Integration: Requiring formal specs for high-impact EIPs to reduce bugs.
- Decentralized Funding Models: Grant programs tied directly to proposal impact and adoption.
As Franci Deng, host of Wen Building, notes: "Governance isn’t just about code — it’s about people, coordination, and shared vision."
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the main difference between an EIP and an ERC?
A: All ERCs are a subset of EIPs focused on application-layer standards (like tokens or wallets), while EIPs also cover core protocol changes such as consensus upgrades.
Q: Where should I submit a new token standard?
A: Submit it to the ethereum/ercs GitHub repository. It will follow the ERC lifecycle with dedicated editors and reviewers.
Q: Does the split mean ERCs are less important than core EIPs?
A: No. The split reflects functional differences, not hierarchy. Application-layer standards drive much of Ethereum’s user-facing innovation.
Q: How can I get involved in reviewing proposals?
A: Join communities like AllERCDevs or Ethereum Cat Herders. Many welcome volunteers to help test, document, or review drafts.
Q: Is there a formal approval process for ERCs?
A: Yes. Like EIPs, ERCs go through stages: Draft → Review → Last Call → Final. Editors oversee this process in the new repository.
Q: Can anyone create an EIP or ERC?
A: Absolutely. Anyone can author a proposal. Success depends on technical merit, community support, and implementation traction.
👉 Start contributing to open blockchain standards today — your voice matters in shaping the future.
The separation of EIP and ERC repositories marks more than a technical reorganization — it represents Ethereum’s growing maturity in decentralized governance. By empowering distinct communities to steward their own domains, Ethereum strengthens its resilience, inclusivity, and capacity for innovation.
As builders continue pushing boundaries in DeFi, identity, storage, and beyond, having clear pathways to standardize their work becomes crucial. Now is the time for developers, researchers, and advocates to step forward — not just as users of Ethereum, but as active participants in its evolution.
Keywords: Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIP), ERC standards, EIP-7329, Ethereum governance, blockchain development, decentralized governance, application-layer protocols