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 ) id 1YyPjL-0003HD-Gj for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 29 May 2015 19:14:07 +0000 Received: from mail-oi0-f47.google.com ([209.85.218.47]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YyPjK-00008q-LZ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 29 May 2015 19:14:07 +0000 Received: by oiww2 with SMTP id w2so63774915oiw.0 for ; Fri, 29 May 2015 12:14:01 -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=ZzkiIt8PGADS633u3LOF564TPv1tSl6jWvhdkXu/nfs=; b=Xoe/yRoSmhwAnOFXM/sQGNXDANwkOzFE7C1gZI2brDFgvkvSsaL/XkWDjq2ZA6Jpvi E132G3co9/icrHupQqNK6rtv1ZT6yQ4caC353nuj/eZXwGHEiQKpg5Djn41RDD8Rwv2s pCyHjHyZpjBo5F2cIl2nvux9riEmoKNuKoZTWAPo/Yx9rVP46oJklj0MifbOga/7ENsz ywz/VKSPToi8u1OtTVlgC+9eE7RgKg18+SI33Hz2o+t5GN8TAa0kY1zxgmMdVKAABBr/ YH1XkbVLL7Rx62wH9V1cMZ4cxsLr7er1FUk9BqFdEuVK1qFFAVk4OHtwq0U/I2yT98+D MfXA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkhEcl8gzrk5mxulFnGosQ/pnCekGeaV6r6o2b26Xrf8T7Z1Ogct7vhAPINp/iv3QhcFnEd MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.45.201 with SMTP id p9mr93570oem.82.1432925251243; Fri, 29 May 2015 11:47:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.86.4 with HTTP; Fri, 29 May 2015 11:47:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <16096345.A1MpJQQkRW@crushinator> Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 11:47:31 -0700 Message-ID: From: Bryan Cheng To: Gavin Andresen Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1d9aa973e9605173ce87c X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1YyPjK-00008q-LZ Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 19:14:07 -0000 --001a11c1d9aa973e9605173ce87c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Gavin Andresen wrote: > What do other people think? > > > If we can't come to an agreement soon, then I'll ask for help > reviewing/submitting patches to Mike's Bitcoin-Xt project that implement a > big increase now that grows over time so we may never have to go through > all this rancor and debate again. > > I'll then ask for help lobbying the merchant services and exchanges and > hosted wallet companies and other bitcoind-using-infrastructure companies > (and anybody who agrees with me that we need bigger blocks sooner rather > than later) to run Bitcoin-Xt instead of Bitcoin Core, and state that they > are running it. We'll be able to see uptake on the network by monitoring > client versions. > > > While I think we'd all prefer Core to make changes like this, the current environment may make that impossible. If this change happens in XT, we will support the necessary changes in our own implementation. The block size limit is a problem _today_, and I'd rather we solve today's problems with today's understanding rather than let speculation about future unknowns stop our ability to respond to known issues. --001a11c1d9aa973e9605173ce87c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On F= ri, May 29, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.c= om> wrote:
What do other people think?


If we can= 9;t come to an agreement soon, then I'll ask for help reviewing/submitt= ing patches to Mike's Bitcoin-Xt project that implement a big increase = now that grows over time so we may never have to go through all this rancor= and debate again.

I'll then ask for help lobb= ying the merchant services and exchanges and hosted wallet companies and ot= her bitcoind-using-infrastructure companies (and anybody who agrees with me= that we need bigger blocks sooner rather than later) to run Bitcoin-Xt ins= tead of Bitcoin Core, and state that they are running it. We'll be able= to see uptake on the network by monitoring client versions.

=


While I think w= e'd all prefer Core to make changes like this, the current environment = may make that impossible. If this change happens in XT, we will support the= necessary changes in our own implementation. The block size limit is a pro= blem _today_, and I'd rather we solve today's problems with today&#= 39;s understanding rather than let speculation about future unknowns stop o= ur ability to respond to known issues.

--001a11c1d9aa973e9605173ce87c--