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
|
Return-Path: <adam@cypherspace.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08C8A1648
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.196])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90CBF63
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-io0-f182.google.com ([209.85.223.182]) by
mrelay.perfora.net (mreueus001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id
0LwYMD-1ajtq82EFr-018Gsc for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 13:00:27 +0200
Received: by ioii196 with SMTP id i196so171145083ioi.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 04:00:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.135.196 with SMTP id r65mr21312746ioi.131.1443438026654;
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 04:00:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.32.164 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 04:00:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+w+GKRCVr-9TVk66utp7xLRgTxNpxYoj3XQE-6y_N8JS6eO6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150927185031.GA20599@savin.petertodd.org>
<CA+w+GKRCVr-9TVk66utp7xLRgTxNpxYoj3XQE-6y_N8JS6eO6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:00:26 -0400
Message-ID: <CALqxMTFEme9gYHTAVVLtFc4JCK4hoBLXEhMCRdEXK9cWso_pUA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
To: Mike Hearn <hearn@vinumeris.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:WpoN3Kexr7a63iEHLqxO/afhcdY8OycgE000IoBraO/G8+uyz0C
ODIUzyxjsNYWAnLqvP38tLbdzSPQmFc+LplW3xNkWZg47Q2rDWvrS8cQgRzHFp7anseXXPa
Iww/y+1oNShqWn10VQuzJpNPNKK8jLrjUsXDQ/g/YIX0b0zVD0BY0I8F63vKL/qdshn4pLZ
XSAUem8RxuYa1MW5DxEMw==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:bbWumf6DNWg=:g9w81EQg7zZkQJi/rdygTS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X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY!
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: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:29 -0000
I wonder what Gavin's views are, he's usually constructive, and see if
he'll include it in XT - I think he may have said he was supportive.
The rationale for soft vs hard-forks is well known, so I wont go over them.
Adam
On 28 September 2015 at 06:48, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> There is no consensus on using a soft fork to deploy this feature. It will
> result in the same problems as all the other soft forks - SPV wallets will
> become less reliable during the rollout period. I am against that, as it's
> entirely avoidable.
>
> Make it a hard fork and my objection will be dropped.
>
> Until then, as there is no consensus, you need to do one of two things:
>
> 1) Drop the "everyone must agree to make changes" idea that people here like
> to peddle, and do it loudly, so everyone in the community is correctly
> informed
>
> 2) Do nothing
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
|
