Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59779EA9 for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 22:58:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0001411C for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 22:58:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:61b6:56a6:b03d:28d6]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C7F2B38A9098; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 22:57:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Hashcash: 1:25:160208:pete@petertodd.org::9SiNhjYLQOtrEa95:QsD8 X-Hashcash: 1:25:160208:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::aC+PVQ3c3LlOO1cv:hz=Hi X-Hashcash: 1:25:160208:gavinandresen@gmail.com::hJuP6/nyC0bsN3qz:aCsIH From: Luke Dashjr To: Peter Todd Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 22:57:34 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.1.13-gentoo; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; ) References: <201602082217.57146.luke@dashjr.org> <20160208224100.GA25684@savin.petertodd.org> In-Reply-To: <20160208224100.GA25684@savin.petertodd.org> X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201602082257.36009.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_SBL, RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Final status X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 22:58:50 -0000 On Monday, February 08, 2016 10:41:00 PM Peter Todd wrote: > On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 10:17:55PM +0000, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > Additionally, https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/315 proposes to > > upgrade five additional from Draft to Final status, and preferably needs > > ACKs from the champions of the BIPs: > > > > BIP 50: March 2013 Chain Fork Post-Mortem, by Gavin Andresen > > It may be good to update BIP 50 with the new information that calling it > a "hard fork" misses subtleties about what happened during that fork. In > particular, 0.7 rejection of the chain was non-deterministic, based on > having seen a re-org in a specific way. I agree BIP 50 could use some rephrasing, but the May 2013 change was definitely a hardfork, despite the problems with the pre-March protocol. Luke