To: Tim Menapace <tim_jannik@gmx.de>, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <mailman.1827.1560068363.7313.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
	<F1FD5AC3-12F0-4087-8AB6-D7DCF7799FF4@gmx.de>
From: Emil Engler <me@emilengler.com>
Message-ID: <d56dfe90-4977-def6-e35b-81bbbdb5c1da@emilengler.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2019 20:56:47 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <F1FD5AC3-12F0-4087-8AB6-D7DCF7799FF4@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 49, Issue 8
Precedence: list

But using the testnet means that you actually need to deal with resets. 
There were 2 resets in the past but the last was in 2011.

Am 09.06.19 um 16:55 schrieb Tim Menapace:
>  >I don't get why the testnet shouldn't be >resetted just because there is
>  >a (probably better) alternative for it. The >testnet is still a thing and
>  >is also used.
> 
> Like Bryan said, lot of miners test here. E.g. new firmware versions, 
> hardware prototypes and operation services. Difficulty will be on 
> current levels in a short period of time.