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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <tomh@thinlink.com>) id 1XbiWz-0008Vt-2u
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 08 Oct 2014 04:07:17 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from mail-pd0-f181.google.com ([209.85.192.181])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1XbiWy-0001rj-9p
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 08 Oct 2014 04:07:17 +0000
Received: by mail-pd0-f181.google.com with SMTP id z10so6161141pdj.40
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 07 Oct 2014 21:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=jGjylNpJAhGi6eSKXOxYv25yEWLeAV5HdYG1NHUR+40=;
b=CwZPDC2BkeoFp1InOxNoLYVoQtKH/RwuiNTQ7qDi2JVfhaP95YNEXBXwyxrGWsOrnT
VjKAnt6c6OXNWnI1ZsA06cRpdy/n7yQOkgHryixnI19KdtLJRI3v0XPzbf8D+sL+/sSr
+Sa8PBS6Qe7n1Zn6htRyEakZZ+o/xQ521SItriFjub8B3XAIWq11PZePWSwwiv7Yi759
SW62R1zaFshhlqTv0e1BXcVVssUH5ldOWrJx+0OnFGB7vfsVvZFpMIiFOadgMVmNEhH3
8vTtcA8LniX7SW8j/jXEjACsNnnHB0CReXBZd3zpUPdql+yHQoXDVWx8v5Qk8E2x/tix
W9SQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnCa+bjxQOhDl6D1wAdySXCTImNeM5khXDlJ2fxevqtl07bzhDPpGeX4BMp8whJs6WiJgSp
X-Received: by 10.66.189.164 with SMTP id gj4mr7630395pac.77.1412741230473;
Tue, 07 Oct 2014 21:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.89] (99-6-44-248.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net.
[99.6.44.248])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id zu8sm5855041pbc.87.2014.10.07.21.07.09
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Tue, 07 Oct 2014 21:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5434B873.1060406@thinlink.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 21:07:15 -0700
From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64;
rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <20141001130826.GM28710@savin.petertodd.org> <CABbpET8_FMCcnh0dELnHsYmF+YP05Gz=nZ3SPkLZuqXYV3JUpQ@mail.gmail.com> <1987325.zKPNeYyO8K@crushinator> <201410031750.27323.luke@dashjr.org> <CANEZrP1eGi-AHgciQiKUuUB7WwqKsMOyTjCQAAO=RWEkPC2Uiw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJHLa0NRNEQLqA2E=ysXsKw6hWS-H9X_AFYK4ckC4-_Bk=qbSA@mail.gmail.com> <20141004003850.GA23202@muck> <CANEZrP0_jDouDCLn9BvxUd7UYiZLbVsaGGkkxwjcOYxZryBDPQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T0Q8g9KYRbAvCV=35x5Rb5HFnrNkrwwMZ=Mv-namMEPpg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T0Q8g9KYRbAvCV=35x5Rb5HFnrNkrwwMZ=Mv-namMEPpg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
X-Headers-End: 1XbiWy-0001rj-9p
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [BIP draft] CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY - Prevent
a txout from being spent until an expiration time
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 04:07:17 -0000
On 10/7/2014 8:50 AM, Gavin Andresen wrote:
>
> I don't have any opinion on the hard- versus soft- fork debate. I
> think either can work.
>
Opinion: if a soft work works, it should be preferred, if for no other
reason than once a hard-fork is planned, the discussion begins about
what else to throw in. To minimize the frequency of hard-forks, the
time for that is when the change being considered actually requires one.
|
