📅 Original date posted:2017-07-12
📝 Original message:On Wednesday, 12 July 2017 03:22:59 CEST Karl Johan Alm via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> Bitcoin development differs from Linux kernel development in a number
> of obvious ways, such as the fact Bitcoin is being "patched in
> flight".
I've heard this before and it doesn't make any sense to me. Just like your
Linux box needs a reboot to get a kernel upgrade, your node needs a restart
to upgrade. Neither the (entire) internet will go down nor the (entire)
Bitcoin network will go down as a result.
> Having *something* like a roadmap that gives the average user some
> insights into what exactly is being planned for Bitcoin is very
> desirable, arguably even necessary,
This is fine, and groups that do development should do this more structured
than something like https://bitcoinhardforkresearch.github.io/
It just would not make any sense to have a roadmap for the *entire* industry
as this would require you to decide what technical solution is better than
another before either of them are fully researched.
Individual groups can have solutions that they believe is the best. And then
we can let the market decide which one is to be actually activated.
--
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
Tom Zander [ARCHIVE] /
npub1mj…dxnq7
2023-06-07 18:04:22
in reply to nevent1q…rqgl
Author Public Key
npub1mju50kqcm07heu967fkq6h4kq666xgekc4yrldf7q52xx9vr8jnsrdxnq7Published at
2023-06-07 18:04:22Event JSON
{
"id": "061dcbbf41ee610cc5f0f14d3fcda525b0760601182919b23718c251fe8b49b2",
"pubkey": "dcb947d818dbfd7cf0baf26c0d5eb606b5a32336c5483fb53e05146315833ca7",
"created_at": 1686161062,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0dbbb3b4fffe9287047e58a8fa04c4b6c95589f2269ea5553f7cb2691feb3b03",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"7ca77bb3628f15322c909727615ce4db97aa2ffa3cd485b829b8a9c3163500f6",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"cf98d015f410ea690e93370543fcb2c3129303ca3921fd6d463206f557722518"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-07-12\n📝 Original message:On Wednesday, 12 July 2017 03:22:59 CEST Karl Johan Alm via bitcoin-dev \nwrote:\n\u003e Bitcoin development differs from Linux kernel development in a number\n\u003e of obvious ways, such as the fact Bitcoin is being \"patched in\n\u003e flight\".\n\nI've heard this before and it doesn't make any sense to me. Just like your \nLinux box needs a reboot to get a kernel upgrade, your node needs a restart \nto upgrade. Neither the (entire) internet will go down nor the (entire) \nBitcoin network will go down as a result.\n\n\u003e Having *something* like a roadmap that gives the average user some\n\u003e insights into what exactly is being planned for Bitcoin is very\n\u003e desirable, arguably even necessary,\n\nThis is fine, and groups that do development should do this more structured \nthan something like https://bitcoinhardforkresearch.github.io/\n\nIt just would not make any sense to have a roadmap for the *entire* industry \nas this would require you to decide what technical solution is better than \nanother before either of them are fully researched.\n\nIndividual groups can have solutions that they believe is the best. And then \nwe can let the market decide which one is to be actually activated.\n-- \nTom Zander\nBlog: https://zander.github.io\nVlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel",
"sig": "5c5f7eb5d4903c88b13c85a7319c240b0344c210b904d1eee36702bb9810a4b15380f9785b78c5a5b351be14794f2493c1cd4d9d6d13fe97be7ba5ce6cf74dc1"
}