Mark EIP5 as Superseded

[axic]

Closes #8.

EIP211 states "replaces: 5".

EIP1 mandates:

Superseded – An EIP which was previously final but is no longer considered state-of-the-art. Another EIP will be in Final status and reference the Superseded EIP.

[axic]

@Souptacular @Arachnid @nicksavers @gcolvin @cdetrio I think this makes sense, but it is the first example of applying these rules from EIP1.

[eip-automerger]

Hi! I'm a bot, and I wanted to automerge your PR, but couldn't because of the following issue(s):

• Trying to change EIP 5 state from Draft to Superseded
• EIP 5 requires approval from one of ([email protected])

[MicahZoltu]

I thought there was discussion about getting rid of the Superseded state? If you want a new EIP, publish a new EIP. The old one is still a valid standard even if no one uses it anymore. e.g., HTTP 1 is still a valid standard even if virtually no one uses it and everyone uses HTTP 1.2.

[MicahZoltu]

Note, this does get into the conversation about "where do we document what any given Ethereum chain implements in terms of core protocols. ETH and ETC implement a different set of EIPs, so I think putting this information in the EIP is the wrong place. However, there is value in making it easy for someone to identify what standards are implemented in any given chain.

[axic]

EIP5 was merged at the time processes were entirely different. I don't think it was well discussed or peer reviewed. I'm not sure what would be the benefit not superseding it.

[Souptacular]

I agree with @axic that at the time EIP5 was merged the processes were different and we need to make it known that it is superseded.