diff options
| author | Tomas <tomas@tomasvdw.nl> | 2015-12-30 19:22:59 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-12-30 18:23:01 +0000 |
| commit | c91e07435dcb0d2118064179c91d9eec9df26399 (patch) | |
| tree | ca8330208ea2e9df426d597b8cd9779625ba9d15 | |
| parent | be461f7dd5aa576671a2077bc2db1f6bb06bd4a1 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-c91e07435dcb0d2118064179c91d9eec9df26399.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-c91e07435dcb0d2118064179c91d9eec9df26399.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Draft] Decentralized Improvement Proposals
| -rw-r--r-- | f7/e1c7c69f43aa6096bcf038dcbc192d6d5a3ae4 | 74 |
1 files changed, 74 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/f7/e1c7c69f43aa6096bcf038dcbc192d6d5a3ae4 b/f7/e1c7c69f43aa6096bcf038dcbc192d6d5a3ae4 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..026852332 --- /dev/null +++ b/f7/e1c7c69f43aa6096bcf038dcbc192d6d5a3ae4 @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ +Return-Path: <tomas@tomasvdw.nl> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0775F1281 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:23:01 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com + [66.111.4.28]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 812C7155 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:23:00 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) + by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE6692032D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Wed, 30 Dec 2015 13:22:59 -0500 (EST) +Received: from web1 ([10.202.2.211]) + by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 30 Dec 2015 13:22:59 -0500 +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= + messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type + :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references + :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=uHJp+JU0xWEsScN + LPTxyKbIQzFE=; b=ReAfSkq187KhLwYHL1TWiYWpjTmJQqsCqBhf9v3SY14do3y + flyyErcKdOwDpcjuYYIfw+6ygL/J8Wcjle+e8ocS4eesN+L0ogUfyLRQ7m8kMYom + gwksKmZTI5ahpO+KXth9MS/JwyT3Ky1gr2YQLkXU8AGvLtAkQgs05aR7C0F8= +Received: by web1.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) + id 83E61AEC9A2; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 13:22:59 -0500 (EST) +Message-Id: <1451499779.3919416.479357794.2C21BFA1@webmail.messagingengine.com> +X-Sasl-Enc: +apFk7tIedZyEThelZgjXPD9UmwbBvkdO17s6+yGvnfK 1451499779 +From: Tomas <tomas@tomasvdw.nl> +To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Type: text/plain +X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-a93c17cb +In-Reply-To: <201512301710.27154.luke@dashjr.org> +References: <1451493317.3215816.479282618.4F666D71@webmail.messagingengine.com> + <201512301710.27154.luke@dashjr.org> +Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 19:22:59 +0100 +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 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: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:35:02 +0000 +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Draft] Decentralized Improvement Proposals +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: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:23:01 -0000 + + +> The specification itself looks like an inefficient and bloaty reinvention +> of +> version bits. + +The actual assignment of version bits isn't clear from the +specification. Are you saying that any implementation that wants to +propose a change is encouraged to pick a free version bit and use it? + +Furthermore, my proposal addresses the danger of forward-incompatible +changes; a hard-fork can no longer occur as every implementation will +agree on the active the set of rules even if it has not implemented +them. This seems to be lacking in the version bits proposal. + +Tomas + |