📅 Original date posted:2015-10-01
📝 Original message:Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0
;-)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marcel Jamin <marcel at jamin.net>
Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak at gmail.com>
I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.
—
Regards,
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM, null
<bitcoin-dev-request at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> bitcoin-dev-request at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> bitcoin-dev-owner at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. Re: Design Competition (odinn)
> 2. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
> 3. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
> 4. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Btc Drak)
> 5. Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
> 6. Re: Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:38:50 +0000
> From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla at riseup.net>
> To: Richard Olsen <richard.olsen at lykkex.com>, bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition
> Message-ID: <560CB8DA.6060801 at riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> Grosses me out that you have enforced KYC as part of what you are
> doing for anyone who would decide to get involved:
> https://wiki.lykkex.com/?id=start#lykke_citizens
> Good luck with that, I'm sure not going to be a part of it, and I
> recommend that no-one else does either.
> - - O
> Richard Olsen via bitcoin-dev:
>> All,
>>
>> We are looking for participants in a Bitcoin related competition:
>> the aim is to build a trading platform (initially for foreign
>> exchange, other assets will follow) which lets participants settle
>> their trades through the blockchain via coloured coins. To
>> facilitate a quicker trade reconciliation, the use of a sidechain
>> is a suggestion but by no means a requirement. There will be an
>> online briefing event today where we will outline the requirements
>> in more detail, though much of it we have posted on our website
>> www.lykkex.com .
>>
>> As we want this to be a community driven effort rather than
>> something turning into a proprietary technology, all contributions
>> will be made available under a MIT license on Github.
>>
>> I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing
>> event or over email,
>>
>> Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing
>> list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
> - --
> http://abis.io ~
> "a protocol concept to enable decentralization
> and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
> https://keybase.io/odinn
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z
> c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/
> Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP
> ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG
> ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt
> KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=
> =41DC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> ------------------------------
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200
> From: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj at gmail.com>
> To: Luke Dashjr <luke at dashjr.org>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID: <20151001085058.GA10010 at amethyst.visucore.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan via
>> bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> > 2015-12-01
>> > -----------
>> > - Feature freeze
>>
>> Where is "Consensus freeze"? Shouldn't this be put off until after the HK
>> workshop in case a hardfork is decided on? Or have we de-coupled it from the
>> release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for it
>> too)?
> In principle, "feature freeze" means that any large code changes will no longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.
> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK workshop I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to decouple consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
> We've seen lot of release date drift due to "this and this change needs to make it in" in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a time-based instead of feature-based release schedule.
> We can always do a 0.12.1.
> Wladimir
> ------------------------------
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:59 +0200
> From: Marcel Jamin <marcel at jamin.net>
> To: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj at gmail.com>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> <CAAUq486=TisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV_KKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?
> 2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
>> > On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan via
>> > bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> > > 2015-12-01
>> > > -----------
>> > > - Feature freeze
>> >
>> > Where is "Consensus freeze"? Shouldn't this be put off until after the HK
>> > workshop in case a hardfork is decided on? Or have we de-coupled it from
>> the
>> > release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for it
>> > too)?
>>
>> In principle, "feature freeze" means that any large code changes will no
>> longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.
>>
>> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK workshop
>> I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code
>> makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to decouple
>> consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
>>
>> We've seen lot of release date drift due to "this and this change needs to
>> make it in" in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a time-based
>> instead of feature-based release schedule.
>>
>> We can always do a 0.12.1.
>>
>> Wladimir
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/5dca9e61/attachment-0001.html>;
> ------------------------------
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:17:52 +0100
> From: Btc Drak <btcdrak at gmail.com>
> To: Marcel Jamin <marcel at jamin.net>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> <CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n_ajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=w=rLhmOkJhfQg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?
>>
> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance releases
> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/dc91562f/attachment-0001.html>;
> ------------------------------
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200
> From: Marcel Jamin <marcel at jamin.net>
> To: Btc Drak <btcdrak at gmail.com>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> <CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Marcel Jamin <marcel at jamin.net>
> Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> To: Btc Drak <btcdrak at gmail.com>
> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
> I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.
> 2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak <btcdrak at gmail.com>:
>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev <
>> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?
>>>
>>
>> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance releases
>> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/17164b7e/attachment-0001.html>;
> ------------------------------
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:56:55 +0200
> From: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj at gmail.com>
> To: Marcel Jamin <marcel at jamin.net>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID: <20151001095654.GB10010 at amethyst.visucore.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:
>> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
> I'll interpret the question as "why is the Bitcoin Core software still <1.0.0". Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the block/transaction versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest network protocol version is 70011.
> Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They just count up, every half year.
> Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all of which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing a number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.
> Wladimir
> ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2
> *****************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/0656d173/attachment-0001.html>;
digitsu at gmail.com [ARCHIVE] /
npub1te…xca36
2023-06-07 17:42:15
in reply to nevent1q…klzp
Author Public Key
npub1tezrev9k6yrwlul4wkham62skpgdsuxeyzr6w4mnphn0ldg463hsmxca36Seen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 17:42:15Event JSON
{
"id": "1695305f92695ed2a217215df3c5ea06e109edd80935f264c23a8c19578851e4",
"pubkey": "5e443cb0b6d106eff3f575afdde950b050d870d92087a757730de6ffb515d46f",
"created_at": 1686159735,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ced113bd26be147e8d813ecc463c35fa0000786b28ac831aa40cc06645efc27b",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-10-01\n📝 Original message:Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0\n\n;-)\n\n\n\n\n---------- Forwarded message ----------\n\nFrom: Marcel Jamin \u003cmarcel at jamin.net\u003e\n\nDate: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00\n\nSubject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\nTo: Btc Drak \u003cbtcdrak at gmail.com\u003e\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is \u003c1.0.0\n\n\n\n\nI'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n—\nRegards,\n\nOn Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM, null\n\u003cbitcoin-dev-request at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to\n\u003e \tbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n\u003e \thttps://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n\u003e \tbitcoin-dev-request at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e You can reach the person managing the list at\n\u003e \tbitcoin-dev-owner at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\n\u003e than \"Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest...\"\n\u003e Today's Topics:\n\u003e 1. Re: Design Competition (odinn)\n\u003e 2. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\u003e (Wladimir J. van der Laan)\n\u003e 3. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)\n\u003e 4. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Btc Drak)\n\u003e 5. Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)\n\u003e 6. Re: Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\u003e (Wladimir J. van der Laan)\n\u003e ----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e Message: 1\n\u003e Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:38:50 +0000\n\u003e From: odinn \u003codinn.cyberguerrilla at riseup.net\u003e\n\u003e To: Richard Olsen \u003crichard.olsen at lykkex.com\u003e, \tbitcoin-dev\n\u003e \t\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition\n\u003e Message-ID: \u003c560CB8DA.6060801 at riseup.net\u003e\n\u003e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252\n\u003e -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\n\u003e Hash: SHA512\n\u003e Grosses me out that you have enforced KYC as part of what you are\n\u003e doing for anyone who would decide to get involved:\n\u003e https://wiki.lykkex.com/?id=start#lykke_citizens\n\u003e Good luck with that, I'm sure not going to be a part of it, and I\n\u003e recommend that no-one else does either.\n\u003e - - O\n\u003e Richard Olsen via bitcoin-dev:\n\u003e\u003e All,\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e We are looking for participants in a Bitcoin related competition:\n\u003e\u003e the aim is to build a trading platform (initially for foreign\n\u003e\u003e exchange, other assets will follow) which lets participants settle\n\u003e\u003e their trades through the blockchain via coloured coins. To\n\u003e\u003e facilitate a quicker trade reconciliation, the use of a sidechain\n\u003e\u003e is a suggestion but by no means a requirement. There will be an\n\u003e\u003e online briefing event today where we will outline the requirements\n\u003e\u003e in more detail, though much of it we have posted on our website\n\u003e\u003e www.lykkex.com .\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e As we want this to be a community driven effort rather than\n\u003e\u003e something turning into a proprietary technology, all contributions\n\u003e\u003e will be made available under a MIT license on Github.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing\n\u003e\u003e event or over email,\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing\n\u003e\u003e list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org \n\u003e\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e - -- \n\u003e http://abis.io ~\n\u003e \"a protocol concept to enable decentralization\n\u003e and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good\"\n\u003e https://keybase.io/odinn\n\u003e -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\u003e iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z\n\u003e c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/\n\u003e Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP\n\u003e ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG\n\u003e ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt\n\u003e KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=\n\u003e =41DC\n\u003e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\u003e ------------------------------\n\u003e Message: 2\n\u003e Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200\n\u003e From: \"Wladimir J. van der Laan\" \u003claanwj at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e To: Luke Dashjr \u003cluke at dashjr.org\u003e\n\u003e Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list\n\u003e \t\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\u003e Message-ID: \u003c20151001085058.GA10010 at amethyst.visucore.com\u003e\n\u003e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8\n\u003e On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:\n\u003e\u003e On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan via \n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e\u003e \u003e 2015-12-01\n\u003e\u003e \u003e -----------\n\u003e\u003e \u003e - Feature freeze\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e Where is \"Consensus freeze\"? Shouldn't this be put off until after the HK \n\u003e\u003e workshop in case a hardfork is decided on? Or have we de-coupled it from the \n\u003e\u003e release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for it \n\u003e\u003e too)?\n\u003e In principle, \"feature freeze\" means that any large code changes will no longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs. \n\u003e I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK workshop I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to decouple consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.\n\u003e We've seen lot of release date drift due to \"this and this change needs to make it in\" in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a time-based instead of feature-based release schedule.\n\u003e We can always do a 0.12.1.\n\u003e Wladimir\n\u003e ------------------------------\n\u003e Message: 3\n\u003e Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:59 +0200\n\u003e From: Marcel Jamin \u003cmarcel at jamin.net\u003e\n\u003e To: \"Wladimir J. van der Laan\" \u003claanwj at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list\n\u003e \t\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\u003e Message-ID:\n\u003e \t\u003cCAAUq486=TisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV_KKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ at mail.gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n\u003e Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?\n\u003e 2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e:\n\u003e\u003e On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:\n\u003e\u003e \u003e On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan via\n\u003e\u003e \u003e bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e\u003e \u003e \u003e 2015-12-01\n\u003e\u003e \u003e \u003e -----------\n\u003e\u003e \u003e \u003e - Feature freeze\n\u003e\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003e Where is \"Consensus freeze\"? Shouldn't this be put off until after the HK\n\u003e\u003e \u003e workshop in case a hardfork is decided on? Or have we de-coupled it from\n\u003e\u003e the\n\u003e\u003e \u003e release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for it\n\u003e\u003e \u003e too)?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e In principle, \"feature freeze\" means that any large code changes will no\n\u003e\u003e longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK workshop\n\u003e\u003e I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code\n\u003e\u003e makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to decouple\n\u003e\u003e consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e We've seen lot of release date drift due to \"this and this change needs to\n\u003e\u003e make it in\" in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a time-based\n\u003e\u003e instead of feature-based release schedule.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e We can always do a 0.12.1.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Wladimir\n\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e -------------- next part --------------\n\u003e An HTML attachment was scrubbed...\n\u003e URL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/5dca9e61/attachment-0001.html\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------\n\u003e Message: 4\n\u003e Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:17:52 +0100\n\u003e From: Btc Drak \u003cbtcdrak at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e To: Marcel Jamin \u003cmarcel at jamin.net\u003e\n\u003e Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list\n\u003e \t\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\u003e Message-ID:\n\u003e \t\u003cCADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n_ajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=w=rLhmOkJhfQg at mail.gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n\u003e On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance releases\n\u003e are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.\n\u003e -------------- next part --------------\n\u003e An HTML attachment was scrubbed...\n\u003e URL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/dc91562f/attachment-0001.html\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------\n\u003e Message: 5\n\u003e Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200\n\u003e From: Marcel Jamin \u003cmarcel at jamin.net\u003e\n\u003e To: Btc Drak \u003cbtcdrak at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list\n\u003e \t\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\u003e Message-ID:\n\u003e \t\u003cCAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg at mail.gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n\u003e ---------- Forwarded message ----------\n\u003e From: Marcel Jamin \u003cmarcel at jamin.net\u003e\n\u003e Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00\n\u003e Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\u003e To: Btc Drak \u003cbtcdrak at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is \u003c1.0.0\n\u003e I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.\n\u003e 2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak \u003cbtcdrak at gmail.com\u003e:\n\u003e\u003e On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance releases\n\u003e\u003e are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e -------------- next part --------------\n\u003e An HTML attachment was scrubbed...\n\u003e URL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/17164b7e/attachment-0001.html\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------\n\u003e Message: 6\n\u003e Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:56:55 +0200\n\u003e From: \"Wladimir J. van der Laan\" \u003claanwj at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e To: Marcel Jamin \u003cmarcel at jamin.net\u003e\n\u003e Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list\n\u003e \t\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule\n\u003e Message-ID: \u003c20151001095654.GB10010 at amethyst.visucore.com\u003e\n\u003e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8\n\u003e On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:\n\u003e\u003e I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is \u003c1.0.0\n\u003e I'll interpret the question as \"why is the Bitcoin Core software still \u003c1.0.0\". Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the block/transaction versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest network protocol version is 70011. \n\u003e Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They just count up, every half year.\n\u003e Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all of which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing a number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.\n\u003e Wladimir\n\u003e ------------------------------\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2\n\u003e *****************************************\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/0656d173/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "83f8aabab4f1b6b362785b65eae7f128b93a184ace8cd81a9a5d4ba2eee37e4922cc88b8cb4527d2e13d29cac75bea02f367bb16885f421162f83222b8ca78a6"
}