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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F8CD904
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 22:00:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f45.google.com (mail-la0-f45.google.com
[209.85.215.45])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B57001EF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 22:00:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by lalv9 with SMTP id v9so11576925lal.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 15:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=Ko6InPjgX3Tr9+xFSYdXydEbjCygqfwLihJXuIdqsUw=;
b=dyem2QCbx9HQz3i5YXvz4uPqNogzUtbK80BR2z9vMrQksK6vxESggfcHOJtAOX9cVq
E0v+ntRTH4yZ7aLGlROu7nW640I6SldtWD/ucyzO65cXQ8Gh9ppZuRY8FW3M8YzJh8nn
vl94eDB9RjCUlABegrUb6+vKbHLaz7Hy+yXhYCdYJUyhAPlricGzAqS71EJ/wl5EY40O
b/88rph22bf01uVN4svyvcShzUTbMsrAOxYOGv9MNO6eGAjzvPB6im+d527nodGDGXT/
KqOWxG772xXCSzQfVvy+ffzI5WjuPJwhXjYojSbtDSh92sR0wrxC7CCa1rr8q+gRvBKI
pBpQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl+eU5HVx+L7zG7SJd19tiic3jLVgzsEIEu/CV7BOJJakGwdRLF1SU/feeq3e6vzEJ/Dh6Q
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.37.196 with SMTP id a4mr13931846lak.59.1440021610140;
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 15:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.15.22 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 15:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E3D72CF4-3D1C-4235-87F9-A035AFF28C27@gmail.com>
References: <CALqxMTFkgGx0FxMiZ77inOZSs_+TQ88Wpj-q-c12COkO9tP4gQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CADJgMzv+cKPY9wrAzbk5pgQJS0=R9KWu-+EuppM=nmXs8RHxYg@mail.gmail.com>
<20150819182010.GB12306@muck>
<CADJgMzskK9iNoRzVr0BtK+XH-x2w5mGZtBiieQpwcGevnHRjGg@mail.gmail.com>
<55D4D9C3.5070004@riseup.net>
<C47D37EE-AE42-4175-AD6B-F6FD0841287B@gmail.com>
<CABm2gDpAOQim63Q7r9r-Pv-K+FqizgDHNUmQ7uheGMuMt-e2QA@mail.gmail.com>
<E3D72CF4-3D1C-4235-87F9-A035AFF28C27@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 00:00:09 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDrefdHeYWF2y_o7A9NxRssC=ddHqY--ExxLv00TS4ShKQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin XT Fork
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: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 22:00:12 -0000
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> wrote=
:
> But the consensus code should NOT be subject to the same commit policies=
=E2=80=A6and we should make an effort to separate the two clearly. And we s=
hould find a way to communicate the difference succinctly and clearly to la=
ypeople (which is something I think the XT opponents have been horrible at =
doing so far).
I think that effort is in progress (again, much slower that I would
like it to be) and it's called libconsensus.
Once we have libconsensus Bitcoin Core it's just another
implementation (even if it is the reference one) and it's not "the
specification of the consensus rules" which is a "privileged" position
that brings all sorts of misunderstandings and problems (the block
size debate is just one example).
|
