📅 Original date posted:2015-09-30
📝 Original message:>
> Field experience shows it successfully delivers new features to end users
> without a global software upgrade.
>
The global upgrade is required for all full nodes in both types. If a full
node doesn't upgrade then it no longer does what it was designed to do; if
the user is OK with that, they should just run an SPV wallet or use
blockchain.info or some other mechanism that consumes way fewer resources.
But if you want the software you installed to achieve its stated goal, you
*must* upgrade. There is no way around that.
Jorge has said soft forks always lead to network convergence. No, they
don't. You get constant mini divergences until everyone has upgraded, as
opposed to a single divergence with a hard fork (until everyone has
upgraded). The quantity of invalid blocks mined, on the other hand, is
identical in both types.
Adam has said "there is actually consensus", although I just said there
isn't. Feel free to say what you really mean here Adam - there's consensus
if you ignore people who don't agree, i.e. the concept of "developer
consensus" doesn't actually mean anything. This would contradict your prior
statements about how Bitcoin Core makes decisions, but alright ....
Finally John, I fully agree with what you wrote. Debates that never end are
bad news all round. Bitcoin Core has told the world it uses "developer
consensus" to make decisions. I don't agree that's a good way to do things,
but if Core wants to stick with it then there is no choice - as I am a
developer, and I do not agree with the change, there is no consensus and
the debate is over.
Hey, I have an idea. Maybe we should organise a conference about soft vs
hard forks. Let's have it down the road from where I live, a couple of
weeks from now. Please submit your talk titles to me so I can vet them to
ensure nobody does an offtopic talk ;)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150930/5e0bab14/attachment.html>;
Mike Hearn [ARCHIVE] /
npub17t…4qgyd
2023-06-07 17:41:39
in reply to nevent1q…9xrl
Author Public Key
npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgydPublished at
2023-06-07 17:41:39Event JSON
{
"id": "1a796a0a3ada43c4ac06d35828b8bc32215c39146989a3e22194d945b39aa3a0",
"pubkey": "f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2",
"created_at": 1686159699,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f5bb1bf208994917ac3ec4154383520df2a8573df815c54d28bae4e41ef024c8",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"633be1264128a805aa61efbb157320e1b7f1c0827e5f1599cb815227b28e61b5",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"b25e10e25d470d9b215521b50da0dfe7a209bec7fedeb53860c3e180ffdc8c11"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-30\n📝 Original message:\u003e\n\u003e Field experience shows it successfully delivers new features to end users\n\u003e without a global software upgrade.\n\u003e\n\nThe global upgrade is required for all full nodes in both types. If a full\nnode doesn't upgrade then it no longer does what it was designed to do; if\nthe user is OK with that, they should just run an SPV wallet or use\nblockchain.info or some other mechanism that consumes way fewer resources.\n\nBut if you want the software you installed to achieve its stated goal, you\n*must* upgrade. There is no way around that.\n\nJorge has said soft forks always lead to network convergence. No, they\ndon't. You get constant mini divergences until everyone has upgraded, as\nopposed to a single divergence with a hard fork (until everyone has\nupgraded). The quantity of invalid blocks mined, on the other hand, is\nidentical in both types.\n\nAdam has said \"there is actually consensus\", although I just said there\nisn't. Feel free to say what you really mean here Adam - there's consensus\nif you ignore people who don't agree, i.e. the concept of \"developer\nconsensus\" doesn't actually mean anything. This would contradict your prior\nstatements about how Bitcoin Core makes decisions, but alright ....\n\nFinally John, I fully agree with what you wrote. Debates that never end are\nbad news all round. Bitcoin Core has told the world it uses \"developer\nconsensus\" to make decisions. I don't agree that's a good way to do things,\nbut if Core wants to stick with it then there is no choice - as I am a\ndeveloper, and I do not agree with the change, there is no consensus and\nthe debate is over.\n\nHey, I have an idea. Maybe we should organise a conference about soft vs\nhard forks. Let's have it down the road from where I live, a couple of\nweeks from now. Please submit your talk titles to me so I can vet them to\nensure nobody does an offtopic talk ;)\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150930/5e0bab14/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "ee9cdc00990c67c630277ca92de6232b61443de7f49ce0b3e8c46f78078618ce623f88decaf08e1c4d203ad848f4209a1a69e7e4bb174d57def9a591f8a9070a"
}