š
Original date posted:2015-12-26
š Original message:On 12/26/2015 05:01 PM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I think the shortest reasonable timeframe for an uncontroversial
> hardfork is somewhere in the range between 6 and 12 months.
This argument would hold more weight if it didn't looks like a stalling
tactic in context.
6 months ago, there was a concerted effort to being the process then,
for exactly this reason.
After 6 months of denial, stonewalling, and generally unproductive
fighting, the need for proactivity is being acknowledged with no
reference to the delay.
If the network ever ends up making a hasty forced upgrade to solve a
capacity emergency the responsibility for that difficulty will not fall
on those who did their best to prevent emergency upgrades by planning ahead.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0xEAD9E623.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 23337 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151226/218f1c1b/attachment-0001.bin>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151226/218f1c1b/attachment-0001.sig>;
Justus Ranvier [ARCHIVE] /
npub1k2ā¦9qd6m
2023-06-07 17:46:28
in reply to nevent1qā¦d3jk
Author Public Key
npub1k2eekmevs6gg60df75qpjw4a2atmy89vx28c8zqq5jxy64tuzrws39qd6mPublished at
2023-06-07 17:46:28Event JSON
{
"id": "3dcc463390f6d58215b37723558e511e2d854481ae7ef689ba68e132667b4de9",
"pubkey": "b2b39b6f2c86908d3da9f500193abd5757b21cac328f838800a48c4d557c10dd",
"created_at": 1686159988,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"d58ef5f27c55f40f82225aaaf9d4842ef2ec79260053b36e96980654a30d74c7",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"241448d3801bac5d3b650872f2afc38eaf6d5e6d49ecbfa4670fdf5527f6c4ff",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"0ff56c09ef879c89ea04bfa2d5f5e0d96000ed6eaf5ac38e7b538a9d92767569"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2015-12-26\nš Original message:On 12/26/2015 05:01 PM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e I think the shortest reasonable timeframe for an uncontroversial\n\u003e hardfork is somewhere in the range between 6 and 12 months.\n\nThis argument would hold more weight if it didn't looks like a stalling\ntactic in context.\n\n6 months ago, there was a concerted effort to being the process then,\nfor exactly this reason.\n\nAfter 6 months of denial, stonewalling, and generally unproductive\nfighting, the need for proactivity is being acknowledged with no\nreference to the delay.\n\nIf the network ever ends up making a hasty forced upgrade to solve a\ncapacity emergency the responsibility for that difficulty will not fall\non those who did their best to prevent emergency upgrades by planning ahead.\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: 0xEAD9E623.asc\nType: application/pgp-keys\nSize: 23337 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151226/218f1c1b/attachment-0001.bin\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 801 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151226/218f1c1b/attachment-0001.sig\u003e",
"sig": "fb3b8d137258498839ff1f660f85eb37359a9e1a029d098ad50faf1379dd67952716b1ab2f79e01db71148cd02b6a7632e9d32ad771180a4d7b334b667da429f"
}