đź“… Original date posted:2012-03-02
đź“ť Original message:Hi,
I got sent this BIP:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_DRAFT:_getmemorypool#JSON-RPC_Method:_getmemorypool
What is your opinion on this? Is it BIP related?
It is a implementation-specific non-bitcoin-protocol proposal. My understanding of BIPs is that
they apply across bitcoin implementations and largely focus on the most generic use-cases
(like the URIs) and the protocol. Things which affect all clients, and allow the system to function
as a united whole.
That BIPs especially focus on the protocol, and that something like this is outside the mandate
of the BIP process.
For instance, we could imagine a future scenario. Bitcoin-Qt is currently based off bitcoind's
codebase. However wumpus built the client in mind with an abstraction layer to enable multiple
backends (a good design). In our hypothetical situation, there are 3 different backend codebases
using Bitcoin-Qt. I do not think a proposal to mandate a changing to Bitcoin-Qt's abstraction
layer or a change in the UI placement would be appropriate BIP material.
OTOH, many clients do need to make use of URIs and the BIP process is totally correct, as it
standardises a behaviour which is needed for interoperability of the network and community.
Thoughts?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20120302/fede72ef/attachment.html>;
Amir Taaki [ARCHIVE] /
npub1ep…m3rel
2023-06-07 03:11:02
in reply to nevent1q…00r6
Author Public Key
npub1ep4j5tjp6cd2774hrx96vh845dwqzhe3z7n3a2a9uxdm2dajqpgscm3relSeen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 03:11:02Event JSON
{
"id": "ab9ad406454245f70b4be7868da00cd7d738d59c23b22928ff3142793aa9c060",
"pubkey": "c86b2a2e41d61aaf7ab7198ba65cf5a35c015f3117a71eaba5e19bb537b20051",
"created_at": 1686107462,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"2e5e8dd3265b5e600cefae61162279031c2b2b91b73991e9dbfd27a9a299ba97",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2012-03-02\n📝 Original message:Hi,\n\nI got sent this BIP:\n\nhttps://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_DRAFT:_getmemorypool#JSON-RPC_Method:_getmemorypool\n\n\nWhat is your opinion on this? Is it BIP related?\n\nIt is a implementation-specific non-bitcoin-protocol proposal. My understanding of BIPs is that\nthey apply across bitcoin implementations and largely focus on the most generic use-cases\n(like the URIs) and the protocol. Things which affect all clients, and allow the system to function\nas a united whole.\n\nThat BIPs especially focus on the protocol, and that something like this is outside the mandate\nof the BIP process.\n\nFor instance, we could imagine a future scenario. Bitcoin-Qt is currently based off bitcoind's\ncodebase. However wumpus built the client in mind with an abstraction layer to enable multiple\nbackends (a good design). In our hypothetical situation, there are 3 different backend codebases\nusing Bitcoin-Qt. I do not think a proposal to mandate a changing to Bitcoin-Qt's abstraction\nlayer or a change in the UI placement would be appropriate BIP material.\n\nOTOH, many clients do need to make use of URIs and the BIP process is totally correct, as it\nstandardises a behaviour which is needed for interoperability of the network and community.\n\nThoughts?\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20120302/fede72ef/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "d06f1e62f7082cf06fb4d4dcd9ae8b2c66596eb52709473093811cbff6cefc10bb4c7e5de289ee088c29846f93408ac4290b02714efd1d21e6baf2b29a3dc10d"
}