📅 Original date posted:2017-04-07
📝 Original message:shaolinfry,
Not sure if you noticed my comments on your earlier orphaning proposal... but if you did you should already know that I really like this proposal... particularly since orphaning valid old blocks is completely unnecessary.
I really like how you pulled out the "lockinontimeout" variable so that this same method could be used in future softfork proposals... instead of hardcoding a special case hack for SegWit.
- it would be nice if the user could set this variable in a configuration file.
- it would be nice if the user could set the "nTimeout" in "src/chainparams.cpp" in a configuratoin file too. This could be used allow a user to expedite when a softfork would become active on his node when combined with ."lockinontimeout".
Developers such as the Core team could put more conservative values in the program, and then community members such as miners and nodes who feel more strongly about SegWit could either compile their own settings or maybe copy a popular configuration file if such was made possible.
Cheers,
Praxeology Guy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170407/5c37bfa4/attachment-0001.html>;
praxeology_guy [ARCHIVE] /
npub1hz…7nzv7
2023-06-07 17:59:31
in reply to nevent1q…gmzt
Author Public Key
npub1hzkv59ax7ax80nv2fzvcgmveqyk3k5sg9gq695n48l9scenf5c9sa7nzv7Published at
2023-06-07 17:59:31Event JSON
{
"id": "9768d520c66d5c8bcc29472c7a56044e271d124ac5ede9e74992673a1fda316e",
"pubkey": "b8acca17a6f74c77cd8a4899846d99012d1b52082a01a2d2753fcb0c6669a60b",
"created_at": 1686160771,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"cba86c36032b98af3b5224ff15dbcd58e8a8562ced21237c3353e2b4d4bc318b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"9e33afbc8efd48b97b8effbcc57b1168ccac6f5fbea092faaf4609de1c4bd0ec",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"512c64351a85e9323c34af13b4dfcf320615bacb09132ae6da9ce671b7942825"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-04-07\n📝 Original message:shaolinfry,\n\nNot sure if you noticed my comments on your earlier orphaning proposal... but if you did you should already know that I really like this proposal... particularly since orphaning valid old blocks is completely unnecessary.\n\nI really like how you pulled out the \"lockinontimeout\" variable so that this same method could be used in future softfork proposals... instead of hardcoding a special case hack for SegWit.\n\n- it would be nice if the user could set this variable in a configuration file.\n- it would be nice if the user could set the \"nTimeout\" in \"src/chainparams.cpp\" in a configuratoin file too. This could be used allow a user to expedite when a softfork would become active on his node when combined with .\"lockinontimeout\".\n\nDevelopers such as the Core team could put more conservative values in the program, and then community members such as miners and nodes who feel more strongly about SegWit could either compile their own settings or maybe copy a popular configuration file if such was made possible.\n\nCheers,\nPraxeology Guy\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170407/5c37bfa4/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "7fd76c72dfa790cfacd3cb57e236e4f38e22fd11eff7d4441afb95dad0acf7be206255bf7a7f27e41466f09b9caf464481e9de661f08366b666b782711ed58c0"
}