diff options
| author | Jorge Timón <jtimon@jtimon.cc> | 2015-06-26 13:13:17 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-06-26 11:13:20 +0000 |
| commit | 3a4e811702b2382984da536d7aabb5b7b1bb34e4 (patch) | |
| tree | f883965827fd2bf58befbde59dcc84ac853bd729 | |
| parent | 19fc3a9c8a9d592a139298b1a99c76b9d28f2e22 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-3a4e811702b2382984da536d7aabb5b7b1bb34e4.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-3a4e811702b2382984da536d7aabb5b7b1bb34e4.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Process and Votes
| -rw-r--r-- | 98/dda81c3d28530ef04722f9767511f76defbecb | 80 |
1 files changed, 80 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/98/dda81c3d28530ef04722f9767511f76defbecb b/98/dda81c3d28530ef04722f9767511f76defbecb new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a39417954 --- /dev/null +++ b/98/dda81c3d28530ef04722f9767511f76defbecb @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ +Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4771ABAC + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:13:20 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-wg0-f45.google.com (mail-wg0-f45.google.com [74.125.82.45]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D555141 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:13:18 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by wgjx7 with SMTP id x7so12417724wgj.2 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Fri, 26 Jun 2015 04:13:17 -0700 (PDT) +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20130820; + h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date + :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; + bh=GcHIAIowd4BrFpdOIDiTGhsQHi+T06YlWvN9HUAjZm8=; + b=NlTwejZFN5OXzs6VPLczV8smYBKQX+I7njg5iFznjInDvWNbhGpGmjeAazzNSILuqR + SR3Leef50zIBhv3a+AmQvoAZf9Dtwr9Rq83xQ8987KRLmItz/YiNM6++auiOSfSJAk2i + RRxhVf32gTlmUgFZVH9O/wec9U73eDBd3wyvDjjHVEyKgHRfisshy/sWwm1d6mHp8Y8c + csuegsImyBl/iqNP77u/4zu/TJrxX7LTLd2ZBB3Uc5WLretZUVlnA3AesxbwQdtOV8vj + 3TcZHS17qCy6Jq+rl2mSSDQjNZ4fMXVyhrSVEBN/hapidG4rc2JFHlx3z61MrnrgY3af + MG4w== +X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm92vTfT4hM714QXbV77/CYyJnPG3ZOm9ivHjBih1jDddNDcnRgjzKpt1x8cMMjgTWFzw5n +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.194.120.198 with SMTP id le6mr2039581wjb.133.1435317197542; + Fri, 26 Jun 2015 04:13:17 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.194.95.168 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 04:13:17 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <558B7352.90708@bitcoins.info> +References: <COL402-EAS127289185B11D0D58E1F5E6CDAE0@phx.gbl> + <558B7352.90708@bitcoins.info> +Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 13:13:17 +0200 +Message-ID: <CABm2gDrCxLyxC=BkgiQOjRczy26kQOZb2+p9xDXOh4HuDG8nRw@mail.gmail.com> +From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc> +To: Milly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +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@lists.linuxfoundation.org +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Process and Votes +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: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:13:20 -0000 + +On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Milly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info> wrote: +> "Cultish" means making claims without any supporting facts. + +On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 5:19 AM, Milly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info> wrote: +> As for developers, the consensus on code changes are almost never 100% and +> someone has to make the decision about what is an a acceptable consensus. + +This statement seems "cultish" by your own definition. +I'm going to make the opposite statement: the consensus on code +changes is almost always 100%. +Mark has already given a couple examples of changes to consensus rules +(the most risky type of change), here's a few thousand other examples +of changes to the bitcoin core's code that had no opposition: + +https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master + +Can you please point us to a few examples were changes were made with +opposition to them? +In those cases (which you assure is what happens almost always), would +you say that the result of letting a decider decide instead of fixing +or addressing all the concerns (either by changing the proposed code +or explaining it) better in restrospective? + |