Return-Path: <digitsu@gmail.com> Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 756731E67 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:25:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qg0-f44.google.com (mail-qg0-f44.google.com [209.85.192.44]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD87C87 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:25:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qgev79 with SMTP id v79so59504387qge.0 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:subject :content-type; bh=IYkFiecQdWI2EQalVHaMG7Ulgeh/DxhDz314oq6DcNI=; b=nQTFjZvFYB1Aw9EnleOFhSEr7fRrcQ80YvR3ZeRKroONVAUtg1AqTr1dsLGifJse6G kYxPNErJfHPHr9oo+duNQKBaPr4im2/W078oC7EhnwGIq+VivSAol0qgbXtVdtlM6+an e900VGqWusTfkeQK1w9cRFMoMwCd74rLqwZ/CiDF9EDxM73oDDxJWbILURJ0GjQI5GSm 6UcN5yIxyO95TKKYZ1kSZBd86n3BFGBRkaU6DA4qEyQ3BgRPoK/np+eH96JMQeP0V0bs Yl0uoD1PWTTlKRuNVtf3ClRuWduEo9dxbUAYTe5DyDaFkFJYZD0QMiT1AN0UptpBsG97 2oNg== X-Received: by 10.140.85.135 with SMTP id n7mr10633575qgd.53.1443695156895; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hedwig-18.prd.orcali.com (ec2-54-85-253-144.compute-1.amazonaws.com. [54.85.253.144]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b91sm2124086qge.8.2015.10.01.03.25.56 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:25:56 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Nodemailer (0.5.0; +http://www.nodemailer.com/) Message-Id: <1443695156118.ad4bc1ee@Nodemailer> In-Reply-To: <mailman.748.1443693419.1627.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> References: <mailman.748.1443693419.1627.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> X-Orchestra-Oid: 9DF71B7C-840E-4FB5-B5BD-05CD7B74CCA3 X-Orchestra-Sig: 164c79f85cef3ae0bbecd4149bdba41bed6c1651 X-Orchestra-Thrid: TD56C876D-E76D-40BE-ACDA-81C322724964_1513822300518443099 X-Orchestra-Thrid-Sig: 8e42e6e9aecb21b76c0a4c25b5eca7ceb38d80d0 X-Orchestra-Account: 6a0e7c82210c410d0fed500a1873b2ff66cab8ef From: digitsu@gmail.com To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:25:59 -0000 ------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0 ;-) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@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@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. =E2=80=94 Regards, On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM, null <bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to > bitcoin-dev@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@lists.linuxfoundation.org > You can reach the person managing the list at > bitcoin-dev-owner@lists.linuxfoundation.org > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than =22Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest...=22 > 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@riseup.net> > To: Richard Olsen <richard.olsen@lykkex.com>, bitcoin-dev > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition > Message-ID: <560CB8DA.6060801@riseup.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dwindows-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/=3Fid=3Dstart#lykke=5Fcitizens > 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, >>=20 >> 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 . >>=20 >> 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. >>=20 >> I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing >> event or over email, >>=20 >> Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F = bitcoin-dev mailing >> list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org=20 >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >>=20 > - --=20 > http://abis.io ~ > =22a protocol concept to enable decentralization > and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good=22 > https://keybase.io/odinn > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z > c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/ > Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP > ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG > ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt > KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=3D > =3D41DC > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > ------------------------------ > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200 > From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com> > To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: <20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-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=20 >> bitcoin-dev wrote: >> > 2015-12-01 >> > ----------- >> > - Feature freeze >>=20 >> Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until after= the HK=20 >> workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled it = from the=20 >> release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for = it=20 >> too)=3F > In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code changes will= no longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.=20 > 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 =22this and this change needs= to make it in=22 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@jamin.net> > To: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com> > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: > <CAAUq486=3DTisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV=5FKKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ@mail.gmail.= com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 > Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer = spec=3F > 2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@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 =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until = after the HK >> > workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled it = from >> the >> > release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for= it >> > too)=3F >> >> In principle, =22feature freeze=22 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 =22this and this change = needs to >> make it in=22 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 >> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@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@gmail.com> > To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net> > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: > <CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n=5FajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=3Dw=3DrLhmOkJhfQg@mail.gmail.= com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer = spec=3F >> > 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@jamin.net> > To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com> > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> > Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: > <CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@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@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@gmail.com>: >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev < >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer = spec=3F >>> >> >> 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: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com> > To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net> > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: <20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-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 =22why is the Bitcoin Core software still = <1.0.0=22. 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.=20 > 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 > ------------------------------ > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2 > ***************************************** ------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div>Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0</div> <div>;-)</div> <div><br></div> <div>---------- Forwarded message ----------</div> <div>From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net></div> <div>Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00</div> <div>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule</div> <div>To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com></div> <div><br></div> <div><br></div> <div>I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.= 0</div> <div><br></div> <div>I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.</div> <div><br></div> <div><br></div> <div><br></div> <div><br></div> <div><br></div> <div class=3D=22mailbox=5Fsignature=22> <br>=E2=80=94 Regards, </div> <br><br><div class=3D=22gmail=5Fquote=22><p>On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM,= bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org <span dir=3D=22ltr=22><<a= href=3D=22mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org=22 = target=3D=22=5Fblank=22>bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.= org</a>></span> wrote:<br></p><blockquote class=3D=22gmail=5Fquote=22 = style=3D=22margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;= =22><p>Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to <br> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org <br><br>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit <br> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev <br>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to <br> bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org <br><br>You can reach the person managing the list at <br> bitcoin-dev-owner@lists.linuxfoundation.org <br><br>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more = specific <br>than =22Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest...=22 <br><br><br>Today's Topics: <br><br> 1. Re: Design Competition (odinn) <br> 2. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule <br> (Wladimir J. van der Laan) <br> 3. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin) <br> 4. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Btc Drak) <br> 5. Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin) <br> 6. Re: Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule <br> (Wladimir J. van der Laan) <br><br><br>---------------------------------------------------------------= ------- <br><br>Message: 1 <br>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:38:50 +0000 <br>From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net> <br>To: Richard Olsen <richard.olsen@lykkex.com>, bitcoin-dev <br> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> <br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition <br>Message-ID: <560CB8DA.6060801@riseup.net> <br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dwindows-1252 <br><br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- <br>Hash: SHA512 <br><br>Grosses me out that you have enforced KYC as part of what you are <br>doing for anyone who would decide to get involved: <br><br>https://wiki.lykkex.com/=3Fid=3Dstart#lykke=5Fcitizens <br><br>Good luck with that, I'm sure not going to be a part of it, and I <br>recommend that no-one else does either. <br><br>- - O <br><br>Richard Olsen via bitcoin-dev: <br>> All, <br>>=20 <br>> We are looking for participants in a Bitcoin related competition: <br>> the aim is to build a trading platform (initially for foreign <br>> exchange, other assets will follow) which lets participants = settle <br>> their trades through the blockchain via coloured coins. To <br>> facilitate a quicker trade reconciliation, the use of a sidechain <br>> is a suggestion but by no means a requirement. There will be an <br>> online briefing event today where we will outline the = requirements <br>> in more detail, though much of it we have posted on our website <br>> www.lykkex.com . <br>>=20 <br>> As we want this to be a community driven effort rather than <br>> something turning into a proprietary technology, all = contributions <br>> will be made available under a MIT license on Github. <br>>=20 <br>> I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing <br>> event or over email, <br>>=20 <br>> Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen <br>>=20 <br>>=20 <br>>=20 <br>> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= bitcoin-dev mailing <br>> list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org=20 <br>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev <br>>=20 <br><br>- --=20 <br>http://abis.io ~ <br>=22a protocol concept to enable decentralization <br>and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good=22 <br>https://keybase.io/odinn <br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- <br><br>iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z <br>c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/ <br>Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP <br>ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG <br>ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt <br>KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=3D <br>=3D41DC <br>-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- <br><br><br>------------------------------ <br><br>Message: 2 <br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200 <br>From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com> <br>To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> <br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list <br> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> <br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule <br>Message-ID: <20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com> <br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8 <br><br>On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote: <br>> On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der = Laan via=20 <br>> bitcoin-dev wrote: <br>> > 2015-12-01 <br>> > ----------- <br>> > - Feature freeze <br>>=20 <br>> Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until= after the HK=20 <br>> workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled= it from the=20 <br>> release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update= for it=20 <br>> too)=3F <br><br>In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code = changes will no longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.=20 <br><br>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. <br><br>We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this change= needs to make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a= time-based instead of feature-based release schedule. <br><br>We can always do a 0.12.1. <br><br>Wladimir <br><br><br>------------------------------ <br><br>Message: 3 <br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:59 +0200 <br>From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net> <br>To: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com> <br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list <br> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> <br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule <br>Message-ID: <br> <CAAUq486=3DTisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV=5FKKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ@mail.gmail= .com> <br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 <br><br>Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer = spec=3F <br><br>2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev= < <br>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>: <br><br>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote: <br>> > On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van = der Laan via <br>> > bitcoin-dev wrote: <br>> > > 2015-12-01 <br>> > > ----------- <br>> > > - Feature freeze <br>> > <br>> > Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off = until after the HK <br>> > workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we = de-coupled it from <br>> the <br>> > release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an = update for it <br>> > too)=3F <br>> <br>> In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code = changes will no <br>> longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs. <br>> <br>> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK = workshop <br>> I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before = code <br>> makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to = decouple <br>> consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases. <br>> <br>> We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this = change needs to <br>> make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a = time-based <br>> instead of feature-based release schedule. <br>> <br>> We can always do a 0.12.1. <br>> <br>> Wladimir <br>> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= <br>> bitcoin-dev mailing list <br>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org <br>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev <br>> <br>-------------- next part -------------- <br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed... <br>URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachm= ents/20151001/5dca9e61/attachment-0001.html> <br><br>------------------------------ <br><br>Message: 4 <br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:17:52 +0100 <br>From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com> <br>To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net> <br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list <br> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> <br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule <br>Message-ID: <br> <CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n=5FajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=3Dw=3DrLhmOkJhfQg@mail.= gmail.com> <br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 <br><br>On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev < <br>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: <br><br>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the = SemVer spec=3F <br>> <br><br>We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance = releases <br>are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example. <br>-------------- next part -------------- <br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed... <br>URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachm= ents/20151001/dc91562f/attachment-0001.html> <br><br>------------------------------ <br><br>Message: 5 <br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200 <br>From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net> <br>To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com> <br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list <br> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> <br>Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule <br>Message-ID: <br> <CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg@mail.gmail.= com> <br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 <br><br>---------- Forwarded message ---------- <br>From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net> <br>Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00 <br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule <br>To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com> <br><br><br>I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.= 0 <br><br>I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production. <br><br>2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>: <br><br>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev = < <br>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: <br>> <br>>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the = SemVer spec=3F <br>>> <br>> <br>> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance = releases <br>> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example. <br>> <br>-------------- next part -------------- <br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed... <br>URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachm= ents/20151001/17164b7e/attachment-0001.html> <br><br>------------------------------ <br><br>Message: 6 <br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:56:55 +0200 <br>From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com> <br>To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net> <br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list <br> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> <br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule <br>Message-ID: <20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com> <br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8 <br><br>On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote: <br>> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0 <br><br>I'll interpret the question as =22why is the Bitcoin Core software = still <1.0.0=22. 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.=20 <br><br>Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. = They just count up, every half year. <br><br>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. <br><br>Wladimir <br><br><br>------------------------------ <br><br>=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= <br>bitcoin-dev mailing list <br>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org <br>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev <br><br><br>End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2 <br>***************************************** <br></p></blockquote></div><br> ------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323--