Paul Sztorc [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2017-07-11 📝 Original message:On 7/11/2017 5:31 PM, ...
📅 Original date posted:2017-07-11
📝 Original message:On 7/11/2017 5:31 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Paul Sztorc via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> I wrote the roadmap to try to be representative of a Core / developer
>> position.
> A fine intention, but I've checked with many of the top contributors
> and it sounds like the only regular developer you spoke with was
> Luke-Jr. Next time you seek to represent someone you might want to
> try talking to them!
That is false. I could provide a list of names but I'm really not sure
what would be gained as result. You yourself admit that it is an
excellent list of research, almost all which you support directly.
So I think your only real objection is that I didn't talk to you
specifically.
>> I am philosophically against hard forks, but HFs were in the end
>> of the previous roadmap so I felt it should stay. And, I felt that if I
> I think the project is not philosophically against hardforks, at least
> not in an absolute sense.
That is why I included them despite being personally against them.
> But if you were instead to talk about things like fixing timewarp,
> recovering header bits, etc. It would clearly be the other way.
It links to bitcoinhardforkresearch.github.io , which I assumed would
contain the hard fork wishlist somewhere, but perhaps it does not.
> In any case, I think it's safe to say that people's opinions on
> hardforks are complicated. And all the smoke right now with unusually
> poorly executed proposals probably clouds clear thinking.
Yes, of course. But is your position that if something is complicated we
should not try to clarify it?
Published at
2023-06-07 18:04:14Event JSON
{
"id": "905087a22bf37f690fb570af0db21bf9390c2739bb0d5b57f2d0b142aac889b3",
"pubkey": "7ac0bd39b854f24cbf067103758f3a9d398c23832d6d75824d190ae35c6c23be",
"created_at": 1686161054,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0dbbb3b4fffe9287047e58a8fa04c4b6c95589f2269ea5553f7cb2691feb3b03",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ccc343b09e440364af25f4bdb44e9cc741bda1bed18aaadb9b2cdb43d3671e6a",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-07-11\n📝 Original message:On 7/11/2017 5:31 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:\n\u003e On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Paul Sztorc via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e I wrote the roadmap to try to be representative of a Core / developer\n\u003e\u003e position.\n\u003e A fine intention, but I've checked with many of the top contributors\n\u003e and it sounds like the only regular developer you spoke with was\n\u003e Luke-Jr. Next time you seek to represent someone you might want to\n\u003e try talking to them!\nThat is false. I could provide a list of names but I'm really not sure\nwhat would be gained as result. You yourself admit that it is an\nexcellent list of research, almost all which you support directly.\n\nSo I think your only real objection is that I didn't talk to you\nspecifically.\n\n\u003e\u003e I am philosophically against hard forks, but HFs were in the end\n\u003e\u003e of the previous roadmap so I felt it should stay. And, I felt that if I\n\u003e I think the project is not philosophically against hardforks, at least\n\u003e not in an absolute sense.\nThat is why I included them despite being personally against them.\n\u003e But if you were instead to talk about things like fixing timewarp,\n\u003e recovering header bits, etc. It would clearly be the other way.\nIt links to bitcoinhardforkresearch.github.io , which I assumed would\ncontain the hard fork wishlist somewhere, but perhaps it does not.\n\n\u003e In any case, I think it's safe to say that people's opinions on\n\u003e hardforks are complicated. And all the smoke right now with unusually\n\u003e poorly executed proposals probably clouds clear thinking.\n\nYes, of course. But is your position that if something is complicated we\nshould not try to clarify it?",
"sig": "4cb29829c2e74b1395a641ff36288e3c39bb12d98b6cdf959b0475990ec79e7a1c59b2c3bf6e5269e3c7d5edd9cc2a8feeb960bae8a13e0c5b181dccc2498ae3"
}