diff options
| author | Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org> | 2017-01-07 16:32:25 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2017-01-08 00:32:17 +0000 |
| commit | 9539470a2e0cead7347ec2fa6f7ba0e8a621e7db (patch) | |
| tree | dba8cada6db193074dbb5ef64a5d4a91358aa329 | |
| parent | f3306613d96e633d1dfe1a02003ce39c29980bd9 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-9539470a2e0cead7347ec2fa6f7ba0e8a621e7db.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-9539470a2e0cead7347ec2fa6f7ba0e8a621e7db.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Classic 1.2.0 released
| -rw-r--r-- | 0a/df3e46ca8fee23ca2c8dd1568b588df7b169a6 | 137 |
1 files changed, 137 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/0a/df3e46ca8fee23ca2c8dd1568b588df7b169a6 b/0a/df3e46ca8fee23ca2c8dd1568b588df7b169a6 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9b210e634 --- /dev/null +++ b/0a/df3e46ca8fee23ca2c8dd1568b588df7b169a6 @@ -0,0 +1,137 @@ +Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C33A902 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sun, 8 Jan 2017 00:32:17 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-pg0-f45.google.com (mail-pg0-f45.google.com [74.125.83.45]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB3A817B + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sun, 8 Jan 2017 00:32:16 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by mail-pg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id 204so9998309pge.0 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sat, 07 Jan 2017 16:32:16 -0800 (PST) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; + h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version + :in-reply-to; bh=6yxOAt4c+EXACjbt3Lc6u/ryKT/FEzMURA+yBaDTJnY=; + b=2QW9IPrUoHCgD/zhZXMdeSL6UaD22ZJLGE+tz7a42Lcn9CGpeYF1rylScGH41gjGF5 + IT/xSRrQJvNJdxc3CITN463kCqfTZoKsTMPHNtc9mZHP9btjIUt1p+xD6uGxH++TfV4G + YALcQUAnliouCJ1IvLKs4/5HkFZzIO9Rsb24wiXrUerxSevSDtd6Bom2ZYVv1JWnyN+I + wfnS8gjDosMYPWfJU0wm+7MFp/MK11qfgD1l29+E06bZGLNEPzmTAZw/oDJueEAAUTkI + 7/d6DgRIgtlKsFZrqE3e6yRzKoMEVKcTHrFE2d7VxwE4yli6YjHBTlZHp6Alm2omPLCU + o3Ow== +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20161025; + h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date + :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; + bh=6yxOAt4c+EXACjbt3Lc6u/ryKT/FEzMURA+yBaDTJnY=; + b=sI07uNP/3jUgvmOeMSh4Jq7mR0h2qe+U4G7xrYwT0mbgnEQnIk6A5pVLtNgZrE/PUx + dmdhhUbLibSzrs5vVWGdcwbPkwtZtSOt+/ioKFVdmvvNux8kC4DsqJDG1vulmjlTfvY0 + e0ueyJ5KvwoWI9UrWFLkwSXNisHCHSakUX8b0En5RMMyE+zIV8EDe3bCYXlIDD78PxUd + o3qbYi2H0A/uxEMZ/UjL5gpcf2/CDYXedmyubp8ZBu1XkAMg5/9e5OH0AQd81Za6bDrb + qBcgn+gy3yPvydlnvChQG9YwCFYumoe6k/Q+XLHJeRjN811vn8WcZOQqSwF8zhPcUrtn + 9oYg== +X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXID5PMGriXZWCyxcFtTDQRRAqcu3NcxSZanbkDZtFwJFjNkcbLJsTHMuhPiGniscg== +X-Received: by 10.98.206.6 with SMTP id y6mr3752426pfg.122.1483835536557; + Sat, 07 Jan 2017 16:32:16 -0800 (PST) +Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:9000:d69e:e8e1:ace0:f3ec:f2b0? + ([2601:600:9000:d69e:e8e1:ace0:f3ec:f2b0]) + by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id + e84sm123295058pfl.79.2017.01.07.16.32.15 + (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); + Sat, 07 Jan 2017 16:32:16 -0800 (PST) +To: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>, + Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>, + Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch> +References: <7169224.bI6Cz5OEL8@cherry> + <CABr1YTfc0BZ21-mwMohqo8_v8D1QnYiGB_SMeCLwFChY2MV_zA@mail.gmail.com> +From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org> +X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 +Message-ID: <9b4e6445-518b-c723-77a4-2c388f2864cc@voskuil.org> +Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:32:25 -0800 +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 + Thunderbird/45.5.1 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +In-Reply-To: <CABr1YTfc0BZ21-mwMohqo8_v8D1QnYiGB_SMeCLwFChY2MV_zA@mail.gmail.com> +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; + boundary="LUbsaA8SqFoVClwcl11OgqQOT27TqJEE5" +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID,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 +X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 08 Jan 2017 00:35:59 +0000 +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Classic 1.2.0 released +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Sun, 08 Jan 2017 00:32:17 -0000 + +This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) +--LUbsaA8SqFoVClwcl11OgqQOT27TqJEE5 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On 01/07/2017 12:55 AM, Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> Your release announcement does not make it clear that Bitcoin Classic i= +s +> incompatible with the current Bitcoin network and its consensus rules. +> It is a hard fork on mainnet with no safe activation as well as +> including other unsafe changes. There is also no BIP for the hard fork.= + +> There is also no evidence of community wide consensus for such a hard +> fork. This is dangerous and irresponsible. + +While I agree with the sentiment, to be fair one should acknowledge that +Bitcoin Core has intentionally implemented two hard forks since Nov +2015. The earlier is released, and I assume the latter will be. + +Neither was subject to activation, or prior public debate (see Buried +Deployments threads): + +https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-November/thr= +ead.html + +There was at least some internal discussion about whether a BIP should +document the latter having occurred, and that question was put to the lis= +t: + +https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-November/013= +275.html + +Some have argued that these are inconsequential changes. I disagree, as +the arguments is base on provably invalid assumptions. Nevertheless, if +hard fork is the threshold criteria here, Core has not met it. + +e + + +--LUbsaA8SqFoVClwcl11OgqQOT27TqJEE5 +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" +Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- +Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) + +iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYcYiZAAoJEDzYwH8LXOFO7wkH/j0V/jGPK5mxGbbGdzyy62c0 +wNrq67nspXiGcY0kAxf6wc3dNm3pDXPvB+H0BSY3Mfp23qcV9WwhFK4kP3dWjjxV +Pivw4LqycyM54WrXNgzpdYqRhxkho6HLcY6s09/UYWcsv+QPTu/hI+E7IUhem8lb +JD1l09PG+4vHi8ntOr2JQJ2Y8gR4UJvJbrVVaSvRFU3wdddum1Qk+XLZJIlYkmhA +NN2dFBzkqg7P3COaifSz+ScxcBnMc8RZSLGtNRGIjfnq5fsNLSYWAQppMiSN5uJA +B+hO6fWRBcX9sKj0+2d34dHUUzSY9IykqyZ83WJQPzKqQIh2Ut+SGsQuUVoG+f0= +=PN9s +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--LUbsaA8SqFoVClwcl11OgqQOT27TqJEE5-- + |