MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzsPT7n+favkjHSuWh1YGQPZQAFLyOgxu4wDNwXSa_-3og@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABm2gDpYdBjyCB=Dor0eE-FdPv9PbVXzWyJf0BPyQ4SDm9VznQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADJgMzsPT7n+favkjHSuWh1YGQPZQAFLyOgxu4wDNwXSa_-3og@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:21:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDq0FEji=cx9gEjoB3zuT8Vykxw6GgqdDv6GyOJjnd6m2w@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Separated bitcoin-consensus mailing list (was Re:
 Bitcoin XT Fork)
Precedence: list

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrot=
e:
>>
>> Apparently that existed already: http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailma=
n/
>> But technical people run away from noise while non-technical people
>> chase them wherever their voices sounds more loud.
>
>
> Regarding disruptors, if there are clear rules about what is acceptable o=
n
> -dev, one can simply moderate out offenders. It's absolutely necessary we
> have a forum where we can share and discuss purely academic and technical
> matters. No-one can accuse censorship because all moderation would say wo=
uld
> be to "take it to the other list". It's essential for all people who are
> developing and maintaining Bitcoin protocol software, or services that re=
ly
> on it. The mailing list used to be very low volume.

I don't disagree with anything you have said. But I think that having
a list specific to Bitcoin Core development will make defining the
"clear rules" easier.

> While we are at it, we should also think about a bitcoin-announce read on=
ly
> list which consumers of Bitcoin Core can subscribe for announcements abou=
t
> new versions of Bitcoin Core, and any critical warnings. Miners and servi=
ce
> providers would particularly benefit from this. The list is moderated so
> only say Bitcoin Core commit engineers are allowed to post.

Not sure if necessary but not opposed to this either.

>> One thing that I would like though, is separating Bitcoin
>> Core-specific development from general bips and consensus discussions.
>
>
> The potential downside is too much separation becomes confusing although =
I
> would not oppose such a change. My own suggestion would be try just a -de=
v
> and -discuss list and see how that goes first. It used to work well.
> Whatever the case I am very confident we need a general discussion mailin=
g
> list.

As said, that list already exists, it's just that nobody uses it:
http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/bitcoin-list/