1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA14940C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:58:53 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148110.authsmtp.com (outmail148110.authsmtp.com
[62.13.148.110])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4029B153
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:58:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237])
by punt16.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t6LDwoRH072323;
Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:58:50 +0100 (BST)
Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com
[75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t6LDwkvf004887
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:58:49 +0100 (BST)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:58:46 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Jorge =?iso-8859-1?Q?Tim=F3n?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>,
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Message-ID: <20150721135846.GB13429@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <CADm_WcZKoMAhYvXbFMbE+5K9HOD75YkQu8_qTW4S6YN6ZMrfjA@mail.gmail.com>
<55A9421B.6040605@jrn.me.uk> <55AC29DB.4060800@jrn.me.uk>
<CABm2gDr6qXzvcpX_To39kCEsnQNTQS4M5Y40Yk_Lw481rjvSag@mail.gmail.com>
<20150721130412.GA4551@savin.petertodd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="eJnRUKwClWJh1Khz"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150721130412.GA4551@savin.petertodd.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 9cdd020a-2fb0-11e5-9f75-002590a135d3
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdAMUEkAYAgsB AmMbWlBeVVV7XWo7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
VklWR1pVCwQmRRp9 cllFFE9ydwFOcHk+ ZERnWXMVVRcuIUZ/
Qh9JFztUZXphaTUa TUkOcAZJcANIexZF O1F8UScOLwdSbGoL
FQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpg CissFRpLGRxDW3Y/ RhsBVSkvEAUOTiN7
Ixs5LBYAHEtZKEI7 PRM9XhpCFjV6
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 102 - kick the can down the road to 2MB
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:58:54 -0000
--eJnRUKwClWJh1Khz
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:04:12AM -0400, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> For that reason I think BIP102 is extremely poorly designed. I can only
> conclude that Jeff Garzik is either deliberately trolling us and/or
> manipulating discussion with a badly designed proposal that he doesn't
> actually expect to be adopted verbatim, or is incompetent.
Expanding on that a bit:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:14:26PM +0800, Jeremy Rubin wrote:
> unsolicited feedback:
>
> I'd send a quick apology for this bit
>
> """
> For that reason I think BIP102 is extremely poorly designed. I can only
> conclude that Jeff Garzik is either deliberately trolling us and/or
> manipulating discussion with a badly designed proposal that he doesn't
> actually expect to be adopted verbatim, or is incompetent.
> """
>
> it's a little over the top.
>
> I think that Garzik is probably releasing it in reaction to the fact
> certain people are only looking at something with code attached.
>
> No need to call someone stupid for sharing a proposal... although it seems
> sketchy that he got a BIP # for this. You want to foster a less hostile
> community...
I don't agree with you at all.
This is a case where if Jeff doesn't understand that issue, he's
proposing changes that he's not competent enough to understand, and it'd
save us a lot of review effort if he left that discussion. Equally, Jeff
is in a position in the dev community where he should be that competent;
if he actually isn't it does a lot of good for the broader community to
change that opinion.
I personally *don't* think he's doing that, rather I believe he knows
full well it's a bad patch and is proposing it because he wants to push
discussion towards a solution. Often trolling the a audience with bad
patches is an effective way to motivate people to respond by writing
better ones; Jeff has told me he often does exactly that.
I think in this case we shouldn't do anything, so short-circuiting that
process by pointing out what he's doing publicly makes sense.
Re: BIP #'s, we explicitly have a policy of allocating them for stupid
ideas, to avoid having to be gatekeepers. Ironically that makes it
harder to get a BIP # if you know what you're doing, because Gregory
Maxwell will argue against you in private and delay actually allocating
one if he knows you should know better. :)
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000d9cad4228c0396ff49c1de60f8ee155928eee22705f6619
--eJnRUKwClWJh1Khz
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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==
=Kfo6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--eJnRUKwClWJh1Khz--
|
