MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56E0C197.7040708@musalbas.com>
References: <201603081904.28687.luke@dashjr.org>
	<56E0C197.7040708@musalbas.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 16:46:57 +0100
Message-ID: <CABm2gDo5eLgr5DhESWp9Bg4JLAq9TS+PX8=PepKAi0tC+bxWSw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Mustafa Al-Bassam <mus@musalbas.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113da7dc794dbf052db3b952
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 2 promotion to Final
Precedence: list

--001a113da7dc794dbf052db3b952
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Mar 10, 2016 02:04, "Mustafa Al-Bassam via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> >A hard-fork BIP requires adoption from the entire Bitcoin economy,
> particularly including those selling desirable goods and services in
> exchange for bitcoin payments, as well as Bitcoin holders who wish to
> spend or would spend their bitcoins (including selling for other
> currencies) differently in the event of such a hard-fork.
> What if one shop owner, for example, out of thousands, doesn't adapt the
> hard-fork? It is expected, and should perhaps be encouraged, for a small
> minority to not accept a hard fork, but by the wording of the BIP
> ("entire Bitcoin economy"), one shop owner can veto a hard-fork.

No, the hardfork can still happen, but if a small group remains using the
old chain (a single person will likely abandon it very soon), then it
cannot be said that deployment was universal and thus the hardfork BIP
doesn't move to the final state. As long as there's users using the old
chain, a hardfork BIP shouldn't become final if I understood BIP2
correctly.

In other words,  uncontroversial hardfork bips can make it to the final
state once deployed, controversial hardforks may never become universally
deployed.

--001a113da7dc794dbf052db3b952
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On Mar 10, 2016 02:04, &quot;Mustafa Al-Bassam via bitcoin-dev&quot; &lt;<a=
 href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.li=
nuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt;A hard-fork BIP requires adoption from the entire Bitcoin economy,=
<br>
&gt; particularly including those selling desirable goods and services in<b=
r>
&gt; exchange for bitcoin payments, as well as Bitcoin holders who wish to<=
br>
&gt; spend or would spend their bitcoins (including selling for other<br>
&gt; currencies) differently in the event of such a hard-fork.<br>
&gt; What if one shop owner, for example, out of thousands, doesn&#39;t ada=
pt the<br>
&gt; hard-fork? It is expected, and should perhaps be encouraged, for a sma=
ll<br>
&gt; minority to not accept a hard fork, but by the wording of the BIP<br>
&gt; (&quot;entire Bitcoin economy&quot;), one shop owner can veto a hard-f=
ork.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">No, the hardfork can still happen, but if a small group rema=
ins using the old chain (a single person will likely abandon it very soon),=
 then it cannot be said that deployment was universal and thus the hardfork=
 BIP doesn&#39;t move to the final state. As long as there&#39;s users usin=
g the old chain, a hardfork BIP shouldn&#39;t become final if I understood =
BIP2 correctly. </p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">In other words,=C2=A0 uncontroversial hardfork bips can make=
 it to the final state once deployed, controversial hardforks may never bec=
ome universally deployed.</p>

--001a113da7dc794dbf052db3b952--