MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJowKgLtu-HUDuakk4DDU53nyChbQk_zY=f5OO2j1Za95PdL7w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJowKgLtu-HUDuakk4DDU53nyChbQk_zY=f5OO2j1Za95PdL7w@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Hampus_Sj=C3=B6berg?= <hampus.sjoberg@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 18:49:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFMkqK_OtZ=S5LFqERCYwSQCkbxdnWJq+wN-YM3CVkKWJx2SBA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1146ebf095c4810552670966"
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Miners forced to run non-core code in order to
 get segwit activated
Precedence: list

--001a1146ebf095c4810552670966
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

I don't think it's a huge deal if the miners need to run a non-Core node
once the BIP91 deployment of Segwit2x happens. The shift will most likely
be temporary.

I agree that the "-bip148"-option should be merged, though.

2017-06-20 17:44 GMT+02:00 Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:

> Are we going to merge BIP91 or a -BIP148 option to core for inclusion in
> the next release or so?
>
> Because a large percentage of miners are indifferent, right now miners
> have to choose between BIP148 and Segwit2x if they want to activate Segwit.
>
>
> Should we be forcing miners to choose to run non-core code in order to
> activate a popular feature?
>
> - Erik
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--001a1146ebf095c4810552670966
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I don&#39;t think it&#39;s a huge deal if the miners =
need to run a non-Core
 node once the BIP91 deployment of Segwit2x happens. The shift will most
 likely be temporary.<br><br></div>I agree that the &quot;-bip148&quot;-opt=
ion should be merged, though.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div clas=
s=3D"gmail_quote">2017-06-20 17:44 GMT+02:00 Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev =
<span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.o=
rg" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</span>:=
<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-lef=
t:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Are we going to merge B=
IP91 or a -BIP148 option to core for inclusion in the next release or so? =
=C2=A0 <br><br>Because a large percentage of miners are indifferent, right =
now miners have to choose between BIP148 and Segwit2x if they want to activ=
ate Segwit. =C2=A0 <br><br>Should we be forcing miners to choose to run non=
-core code in order to activate a popular feature?<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><f=
ont color=3D"#888888"><br><br>- Erik</font></span></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a1146ebf095c4810552670966--