1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1VY1ib-00074O-Q6
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 20 Oct 2013 22:43:29 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.148.112 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.148.112; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail148112.authsmtp.co.uk;
Received: from outmail148112.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.148.112])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1VY1iZ-0004HU-VO for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 20 Oct 2013 22:43:29 +0000
Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237])
by punt9.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id r9KMhKCF063752;
Sun, 20 Oct 2013 23:43:20 +0100 (BST)
Received: from savin (76-10-178-109.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.178.109])
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r9KMhHdX041622
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Sun, 20 Oct 2013 23:43:19 +0100 (BST)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 18:43:16 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>
Message-ID: <20131020224316.GA25280@savin>
References: <CAKLmikPZhhTs2rf5h52KHLrWB38S=JgiOc+pCPx0FXvT7c_aow@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgTcTKAA0Xdzk3xZ-3sWwoPgPGmQdugG-0jjhPmntXitfQ@mail.gmail.com>
<38895569-E6E1-4576-9E36-B00B53F9D3CC@me.com>
<201310192229.19932.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAAS2fgRu1j0w8RsiYutixEDxs1NYZVxQ7D7VRgDVi1b-wx+vUQ@mail.gmail.com>
<19909B49-0895-4130-99FB-9A116140CFE9@me.com>
<20131019235746.GA29032@savin>
<9EF588BB-14B5-495A-8253-82574DCB1A8A@me.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9EF588BB-14B5-495A-8253-82574DCB1A8A@me.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 04d463db-39d9-11e3-94fa-002590a135d3
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdAIUF1YAAgsB AmUbWVdeVF57W2M7 bAxPbAVDY01GQQRq
WVdMSlVNFUsqCGd8 XmZKOhl2dgNEejBy ZUdrWD5bWBB+c0Up
EFNXHDkPeGZhPWMC WUQOJh5UcAFPdx8U a1N6AHBDAzANdhES
HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA4iVjUm RgwDBCgiVUoLDy8y
MxchK1hUG14cNA0p NkY7Ul95OBgXDxBY Hl1caMCf
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 76.10.178.109/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information. [URIs: imperialviolet.org]
X-Headers-End: 1VY1iZ-0004HU-VO
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open
source community
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 22:43:30 -0000
--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 05:52:49PM -0700, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:
> Interesting. The main reason I wrote my proposal was because the only pro=
posal that came close to covering the same area was BIP 39, which at that t=
ime had 2 paragraphs of text (although admittedly did link to a text file o=
ff site where the draft was being developed). And currently there are 2 pro=
posals that have numbers allocated but are empty (BIP 40 and 41) with no re=
ferences to the development or discussion.
>=20
> I appreciate the fact that acceptance of proposals on the BIP page are mo=
re strict, but it may be desirable to have the enforcement be more uniform.=
Also, BIP 38 is gaining more acceptance out in the community (many sites s=
upport the import of these keys and a growing number of paper wallet sites =
/ coin / card vendors are offering it as an option), yet it's still missing=
from the BIP list, which seems to me a bit counter to the arguments given =
about community acceptance.
No, that just means the authors of BIP 38 know community acceptance is
the most important thing; BIP numbers are secondary.
FWIW I think that BIP's should have been done as a github repository,
allowing for dealing with this stuff transparently as a pull-request.
It'd also be useful to handle BIP's that way to make it easy to archive
them, update them, and keep a log of what and why they were updated.
Just put them in markdown format, which is pretty much feature
equivalent to the wiki now that markdown supports images.
> > FWIW I myself haven't pushed hard for getting an "official" BIP number
> > for my draft NODE_BLOOM BIP, even though I've got support from most of
> > the dev team on the pull-request:
> > https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2900 I'm probably at the point
> > where I could get one assigned - Litecoin for instance has made that
> > change - but really I just see that as a formality; that it's still a
> > controversial idea is much more relevant.
>=20
>=20
> > In any case I don't see any working code in your email, I'd suggest
> > writing some. You're BIP would be much more likely to be accepted if you
> > were more involved in wallet development.
>=20
> Good point. I'm developing my own client (which has the code up and runni=
ng, with unit tests), but I'm not ready to release it just yet until I've g=
ot all the client's alpha features working. Would putting contact informati=
on there so people can ask for the relevant code be sufficient until I have=
my client up on github?
No, just put the client up on github. If you think actually using it is
dangerous, just delibrately make it hard to use for people who shouldn't
be using it. Leave out compilation documentation for instance, or make
it check that it's on testnet first and refuse to run if it isn't.
Pond for instance doesn't make binaries available:
https://pond.imperialviolet.org/ IIRC only recently have they provided a
makefile.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000b647feda1820ad95b2ea9efb742e9087b022bd3d37530dc06
--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)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==
=z9C3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1--
|
