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
|
Return-Path: <jgarzik@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9225B171B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com (mail-wi0-f173.google.com
[209.85.212.173])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0ECED2F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicge5 with SMTP id ge5so23564800wic.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:50:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=ZeRP0LYfA3820wPaIESuPdgcLxndLtSVR7X+EdooepM=;
b=omWlzcflhBwaM4MbU4kvHNoLdGq69HgfR54iYyPSVv6lNRvQJFTMLEFQ2dbs17e9i5
gCujWe+VCEuT/9ZdU7EkAJCFrwPGMjTScVxqJcCJ0FAWrk1aNUF0vC08hZHOL7SeKplq
YbLkg4Gt6fLFOGQh4Hzt2ZB3b0gmExCLuwpqNrOlLMemBkmAjEZ2VuSGzL2H0HKzTakx
Wh8U5OAUxeU7w45CEuEHjBkAd0OxFvFTP2l/x2Ct9VMfC9YID7jfT1/i3x8BVfQNPplm
xziJCEnaSS221XPQSsNNV1YYOIFDN1NzAD7bX6ck4nc5GsZsrP2PLltCXiYePhFopPLx
j5bg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.88.4 with SMTP id bc4mr2814714wib.68.1443696635659; Thu,
01 Oct 2015 03:50:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.158.9 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:50:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150924112555.GA21355@amethyst.visucore.com>
<201509301757.44035.luke@dashjr.org>
<20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com>
<CAAUq486=TisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV_KKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n_ajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=w=rLhmOkJhfQg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAUq484+g89yD+s7iR_mGWPM3TTN7V6-EPb1ig=P1BKfcbztPg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 06:50:35 -0400
Message-ID: <CADm_WcY-t+pGFGVeiy1XAKKYJ6ULfa8AmLB_+QCxcPdkp_84bA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@gmail.com>
To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04428ee421ca0a052108d154
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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 development mailing list <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
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: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:50:37 -0000
--f46d04428ee421ca0a052108d154
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
>
I've said the same thing years ago. Originally the "1.0" was a target for
whenever "client mode" as planned by Satoshi was implemented, making the
Bitcoin Core implementation feature-complete for as a minimum
working/viable project.
Ultimately it is not so important and tends to generate a lot of discussion
- so maybe we should just do the emacs thing and go from 0.12 to 12.0 for
next version.
--f46d04428ee421ca0a052108d154
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-d=
ev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundatio=
n.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></spa=
n> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockqu=
ote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc s=
olid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">I guess the question then becomes w=
hy bitcoin still is <1.0.0</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'v=
e said the same thing years ago.=C2=A0 Originally the "1.0" was a=
target for whenever "client mode" as planned by Satoshi was impl=
emented, making the Bitcoin Core implementation feature-complete for as a m=
inimum working/viable project.</div><div><br></div><div>Ultimately it is no=
t so important and tends to generate a lot of discussion =C2=A0- so maybe w=
e should just do the emacs thing and go from 0.12 to 12.0 for next version.=
</div><div><br></div><div>=C2=A0</div></div></div></div>
--f46d04428ee421ca0a052108d154--
|
