Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 388BFA7B for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 09:02:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx.kolabnow.com (mx.kolabnow.com [95.128.36.41]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21C51F3 for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 09:02:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by ext-mx-out003.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0EBAB19 for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:02:55 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kolabnow.com; h= content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:date:date:subject:subject :from:from:received:received:received; s=dkim20160331; t= 1499850173; x=1499850195; bh=cE8CO0IN4ElXZfdCWWySreCycjfPxDMaArc ZrHuIG3Y=; b=e73t6r1ppOwVV4zNk/Xz/lHcdqvP0DKBJIK34CCq623bl4bZU5O Jo/68Y/QDT7uiEneN+4le1/fYhBmd3E4mG/tb8pr6Qihths6w/wCv9Ejc8ynxG/8 ieXAdc/bqoCc+Z7sCUaYrcB9v9mpIo+5/U9+EB3EiZLD7epCVShyEp76RVpDl9a8 8kMI268bvQWSol88HGuFULZWXzRi+OM4Cb25BHAhTtVMXxCuZlKlLYVVuETSex0y 4GzcurBIDqbAXonmvM09JUFZLi2ZNyuv1NJVO8qDlhy8DXLA7ovKxtU7s5swcjGS sJq8pEhkHkUMRpMEyzUBKeHBt6ST9st2b+BOIlzJetNzoaztucu3GBr6MI20waYx wxbq95Uy1bBdU7UfWPCCVk6RBnxKm9AOFEjFA3X0rrYz/7EbeyKB88/QvePlJEKI /vbRbUXQZ+8hPHTfpBEc+E7nmpvv1HGd09sfEhEBVdyCidZ0+nX4mecevqJKn8/6 Z36LFzz0vAwP/MLfKlGjUUzNAxMmFYakmLY+VcpuqOyB1dpC4XDsveHcpdtzu3BW zzZqwkft+SmvTBIi2QrAbo8OxnRo/8HXE7hlVNBlHmWcwbIQzRkWQZO1UhToOCM1 adYiQ34YvghGnA2i5A4v0nPYlie8BkFi6eBw0npeWmZaR6D8BPLXoM5g= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mykolab.com Received: from mx.kolabnow.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ext-mx-out003.mykolab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QwgHld-CKPmh for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:02:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from int-mx003.mykolab.com (unknown [10.9.13.3]) by ext-mx-out003.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAA56397 for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:02:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ext-subm002.mykolab.com (unknown [10.9.6.2]) by int-mx003.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC18529DD for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:02:53 +0200 (CEST) From: Tom Zander To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:02:51 +0200 Message-ID: <6345529.fq5kzMBjkQ@strawberry> In-Reply-To: References: <0119661e-a11a-6d4b-c9ec-fd510bd4f144@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID 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, 12 Jul 2017 12:28:15 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Updating the Scaling Roadmap X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 09:02:58 -0000 On Tuesday, 11 July 2017 23:11:38 CEST Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev=20 wrote: > I think it's great that people want to experiment with things like > drivechains/sidechains and what not, but their security model is very > distinct from Bitcoin's and, given the current highly centralized > mining ecosystem, arguably not very good. So positioning them as a > major solution for the Bitcoin project is the wrong way to go. Instead > we should support people trying cool stuff, at their own risk. > > So, given that although the vast majority of the things in the document > are things I've been supporting for months (Please see Note 1 way down > at the bottom) I cannot support your document. I=E2=80=9Dm thinking along the same lines, a industry wide roadmap makes ve= ry little=20 sense. Much like in Linux we have a lot of smaller groups doing their own thing,=20 all working for the good of Linux as they see it, and implicitly, as they=20 use it. I think its safe to say that Linus would not want any say over the roadmap= =20 of Intel or Google or any other particpant in the Linux space. I am in agreement with Gregory that we should reject a Bitcoin-wide scaling= =20 roadmap. I do suggest that smalle groups publish their individual roadmaps, show wha= t=20 they are planning to work on in a place that people will find it (a website= ,=20 not a mailinglist archive). Those individual roadmaps then show what that group will work on, which=20 helps their communication. It helps people talking about Bitcoin to the=20 general public as well, and it helps people understand whom they would like= =20 to support financially or otherwise. =2D-=20 Tom Zander Blog: https://zander.github.io Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel