📅 Original date posted:2014-12-15
📝 Original message:> While it would be nice to have a library encapsulating the consensus code, this
> shouldn't come at the cost of safety, especially when the actual users of that
> library or their needs is still uncertain.
While I agree that it shouldn't come at unreasonable risk, my whole
reason for prioritizing the consensus library is that it is the first
step toward the goal of isolating the consensus code completely. As
soon as it exists in a repository by itself, it is easier to enforce a
different regime of change control there, or even freeze it completely
over time. To keep track of consensus changes one'd only have to
follow that repository, instead of filter it between tons of GUI, RPC
or utility commits.
IMO having the consensus isolated into a portable self-contained
library is the most important goal of Bitcoin Core project at this
point. I've tried to keep the amount of unnecessary refactoring down,
but some is unfortunately unavoidable.
I'm sure we can find a way to rebase CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY so that it
can land in 0.11.
Wladimir
Wladimir [ARCHIVE] /
npub1xq…ymc2p
2023-06-07 15:28:05
in reply to nevent1q…zyql
Author Public Key
npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2pPublished at
2023-06-07 15:28:05Event JSON
{
"id": "a558caadb94ce65fbaa53f94ebe5047ccfb9c719df2b5ed7c1e241bf591c55ae",
"pubkey": "30217b018a47b99ed4c20399b44b02f70ec4f58ed77a2814a563fa28322ef722",
"created_at": 1686151685,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"993d6fbc6e64567cc5e832edf43a4bb7317bff0c058ca1944794e178efa7bba2",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"4f38e67c38b2ecf49410c02b2d409469eb8f1ddb19890e9bb3a7b2d85920ee20",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-12-15\n📝 Original message:\u003e While it would be nice to have a library encapsulating the consensus code, this\n\u003e shouldn't come at the cost of safety, especially when the actual users of that\n\u003e library or their needs is still uncertain.\n\nWhile I agree that it shouldn't come at unreasonable risk, my whole\nreason for prioritizing the consensus library is that it is the first\nstep toward the goal of isolating the consensus code completely. As\nsoon as it exists in a repository by itself, it is easier to enforce a\ndifferent regime of change control there, or even freeze it completely\nover time. To keep track of consensus changes one'd only have to\nfollow that repository, instead of filter it between tons of GUI, RPC\nor utility commits.\n\nIMO having the consensus isolated into a portable self-contained\nlibrary is the most important goal of Bitcoin Core project at this\npoint. I've tried to keep the amount of unnecessary refactoring down,\nbut some is unfortunately unavoidable.\n\nI'm sure we can find a way to rebase CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY so that it\ncan land in 0.11.\n\nWladimir",
"sig": "fe8dc1c32de3dbe8c459f9305c7661a9fcb0be91458183dbcbc336f2180996255e6cac8740af7d9e77c60bb387489c1bfe9484dd4e92e47b2e3fd5fdbee1319c"
}