In-Reply-To: <d2e0dd76-e6ec-8ccb-5a33-48f0d005afe9@librelamp.com>
References: <f27bd300c20d1b48cddc7e1d1dc1a96c@112bit.com>
	<615c88d2a1263810923705c170b25d33@112bit.com>
	<d2e0dd76-e6ec-8ccb-5a33-48f0d005afe9@librelamp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
From: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 02:22:21 +0000
To: Alice Wonder <alice@librelamp.com>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Alice Wonder via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <9E1EA42E-B37E-47C9-89B0-37F4CDB2B711@mattcorallo.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Planned Obsolescence
Precedence: list

Please do report bugs to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin . If you never report them of course they won't get fixed. I'm not aware of test suite failures and know a bunch of folks who use CentOS, though not sure how many develop on it.

On December 18, 2016 12:07:36 PM PST, Alice Wonder via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>On 12/14/2016 07:38 PM, Juan Garavaglia via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
>>
>> For reasons I am unable to determine a significant number of node
>> operators do not upgrade their clients.
>
>I almost did not update to 0.13.0 because the test suite was failing
>due 
>to python errors. How to fix them was posted on bitcointalk.
>
>0.13.1 came with new python errors in the test suite. So I just said 
>fuck it.
>
>When the test suite actually works in my fairly standard environment 
>(CentOS) in the distributed release, I will upgrade.
>
>Until then, I'm not jumping through hoops to make the test suite work 
>and I'm not running clients that haven't passed the test suite so
>that's 
>why I almost didn't update to 0.13.0 and haven't updated since.
>_______________________________________________
>bitcoin-dev mailing list
>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev