EIPs VS openzeppelin-contracts

Even more relevant would be the Ethereum Improvement Proposal repo (where people submit proposals to change the spec):

https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs

Or the go-ethereum execution client (the most popular execution client):

https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum

It’s early in the life of the xERC20 standard, but progress is quickly being made. The standard has been audited and is already live with a few projects. The EIP to adopt the standard has been created, and implementation has begun. Alchemix recently announced support for the xERC20 standard. And Defi Wonderland has published a suggested implementation on their GitHub. This implementation has an interface for the xERC20 contract with eight core functions that the token issuer must implement. These are functions related to setting the Lockbox contract (setLockbox), issuance limits for bridges (setLimits, mintingMaxLimitOf, burningMaxLimitOf, etc.), and the core mint and burn functions.

Check out EIP-7517: Giving Consent for AI Data Mining on the Blockchain

ERC223 is not widely implemented, and there is some debate in the ERC discussion thread about backward compatibility and trade-offs between implementing changes at the contract interface level versus the user interface.

Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs): These are proposals to change various aspects of Ethereum. They often contain detailed technical discussion and can be a good resource for understanding the finer points of how Ethereum works. EIPs can be found here: https://eips.ethereum.org/

Worth looking at: EIP6968: Contract Secured Revenue on an EVM based L2 https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/6969/files

Additionally, I have made an EIP that can help standardise and maintain official contract registry of each DApp. This can help identify official contracts of a protocol vs scammers using fraud contracts but presenting like official protocol. https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/6807

Lets look the events of Open Zeppelin’s ERC20 token contract:

ERC-777 is difficult to implement properly, due to its susceptibility to different forms of attack(opens in a new tab). It is recommended to use ERC-20 instead. This page remains as a historical archive.

This depends if you're writing a contract from scratch or using existing code. If you're making something new, then yes (recommend not to use THE most recent available, always better to go with tried and tested). For existing projects, never try to override the solidity version. This may be a pain with "@" imports - ideally everyone should specify the library version (e.g. https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol).