📅 Original date posted:2015-09-28
📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
And still no movement on BIP 63...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1083961.20
Apart from that,
All my prior objections to XT still hold as expressed on this list.
XT is not acceptable.
On the topic of consensus:
Reaching consensus, I hope, is something that developers can
accomplish by refining and adjusting the BIPS and coming to agreement
upon them. This should be something that can be done in a few months
time, before the end of the year.
Cheers,
- - O
Adam Back via bitcoin-dev:
> I wonder what Gavin's views are, he's usually constructive, and see
> if he'll include it in XT - I think he may have said he was
> supportive.
>
> The rationale for soft vs hard-forks is well known, so I wont go
> over them.
>
> Adam
>
>
> On 28 September 2015 at 06:48, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> There is no consensus on using a soft fork to deploy this
>> feature. It will result in the same problems as all the other
>> soft forks - SPV wallets will become less reliable during the
>> rollout period. I am against that, as it's entirely avoidable.
>>
>> Make it a hard fork and my objection will be dropped.
>>
>> Until then, as there is no consensus, you need to do one of two
>> things:
>>
>> 1) Drop the "everyone must agree to make changes" idea that
>> people here like to peddle, and do it loudly, so everyone in the
>> community is correctly informed
>>
>> 2) Do nothing
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev
>> mailing list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________ 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-----
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWCa0jAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CuCUIALiRt6cE3b+9f+l9m6aMTjIR
vTEIM/7B4dIZW9eatXmkxyd44uz5YoN93SlZtV62c90HCqqpFRBCfyXRyXzQ11E7
0i70or5LnWDOqrD1bSsCEdrQxPIpAQnv101UHe3iyn/uHAVBiz/HfqvGMruNt0r1
4sMecp+LedWpy6/p9c6iMHV1rhtYRfmRfJHj+9KlSn+in5PQKx2kieWqpfqjmlNs
J/UNoLvRuF0YxDcqEdp2BAaI0s+NyXBo3YDi4R77U9YPRj/cYuWHh/yPKAvFW+2K
0d9NNuKSKEY/m4uW3ghPEJL7OxlGbOoNWFS3kcKYr+BanfsPTov7yHQhBuRBRPw=
=hd0W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
odinn [ARCHIVE] /
npub1xv…5j2ga
2023-06-07 17:41:30
in reply to nevent1q…gad2
Author Public Key
npub1xv3g4rkhj7eyape0cqjhc9g4ljdu5axqkgcdewma854a8r7e0mtsl5j2gaPublished at
2023-06-07 17:41:30Event JSON
{
"id": "63bd267b70b17f8a3688ef12ed1307c6c1d9d78c3080b603cf4e3b21d2b58bb7",
"pubkey": "33228a8ed797b24e872fc0257c1515fc9bca74c0b230dcbb7d3d2bd38fd97ed7",
"created_at": 1686159690,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f5bb1bf208994917ac3ec4154383520df2a8573df815c54d28bae4e41ef024c8",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"1ef89e2d16bdbb674248ff5ae66ce120efc3a7037c06864f389dde49b186d635",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-28\n📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA512\n\nAnd still no movement on BIP 63...\n\nhttps://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1083961.20\n\nApart from that,\n\nAll my prior objections to XT still hold as expressed on this list.\nXT is not acceptable.\n\nOn the topic of consensus:\n\nReaching consensus, I hope, is something that developers can\naccomplish by refining and adjusting the BIPS and coming to agreement\nupon them. This should be something that can be done in a few months\ntime, before the end of the year.\n\nCheers,\n\n- - O\n\nAdam Back via bitcoin-dev:\n\u003e I wonder what Gavin's views are, he's usually constructive, and see\n\u003e if he'll include it in XT - I think he may have said he was\n\u003e supportive.\n\u003e \n\u003e The rationale for soft vs hard-forks is well known, so I wont go\n\u003e over them.\n\u003e \n\u003e Adam\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e On 28 September 2015 at 06:48, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev \n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e There is no consensus on using a soft fork to deploy this\n\u003e\u003e feature. It will result in the same problems as all the other\n\u003e\u003e soft forks - SPV wallets will become less reliable during the\n\u003e\u003e rollout period. I am against that, as it's entirely avoidable.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e Make it a hard fork and my objection will be dropped.\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e Until then, as there is no consensus, you need to do one of two\n\u003e\u003e things:\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e 1) Drop the \"everyone must agree to make changes\" idea that\n\u003e\u003e people here like to peddle, and do it loudly, so everyone in the\n\u003e\u003e community is correctly informed\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e 2) Do nothing\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\u003e mailing list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org \n\u003e\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing\n\u003e list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org \n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \n\n- -- \nhttp://abis.io ~\n\"a protocol concept to enable decentralization\nand expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good\"\nhttps://keybase.io/odinn\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\niQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWCa0jAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CuCUIALiRt6cE3b+9f+l9m6aMTjIR\nvTEIM/7B4dIZW9eatXmkxyd44uz5YoN93SlZtV62c90HCqqpFRBCfyXRyXzQ11E7\n0i70or5LnWDOqrD1bSsCEdrQxPIpAQnv101UHe3iyn/uHAVBiz/HfqvGMruNt0r1\n4sMecp+LedWpy6/p9c6iMHV1rhtYRfmRfJHj+9KlSn+in5PQKx2kieWqpfqjmlNs\nJ/UNoLvRuF0YxDcqEdp2BAaI0s+NyXBo3YDi4R77U9YPRj/cYuWHh/yPKAvFW+2K\n0d9NNuKSKEY/m4uW3ghPEJL7OxlGbOoNWFS3kcKYr+BanfsPTov7yHQhBuRBRPw=\n=hd0W\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----",
"sig": "ca7408d281ee0146c6661cef985912b0654b9c0f1657b13196a8e8790aa9fe62a085c06d7100c33093241e183af297e4b3e5404dda72b2cc4f94bc5d34de0606"
}