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
|
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 9573F3C8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 31 Jul 2015 20:37:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com (mail-wi0-f171.google.com
[209.85.212.171])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC086269
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 31 Jul 2015 20:37:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicgj17 with SMTP id gj17so32525409wic.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:37:43 -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;
bh=kUu4g9oP1btT48m1j3qDjTz3h421DcyNtnj0gzxoFu8=;
b=KcsTNOtU52wLxGAHIyYOhdgLxlGkhy2mHpXL+hiFyNr9FmqLZXPCWG2bT5BxCT/aGg
ZeCidNMXDBF2DMEJtwPbAQGiSTvU/EuUdWHTz2uPEoIu4xkSesWcL0ZiPrsPNmJcHe9a
AJLPMx0GswguELP7yrMx8VabE/+VMTGnicblH5TiURD3+5g3Svsgi6X6rRcTZUUljzWi
FqCjFqaLkqmpFmIZTyHVXlUiAepMhhnkYheMIr8cok87mumwZXnD1XILWRCxTVuOfpkl
+rQogv7CcAEByhvGu4Dq5yz0pbxKKrVczq0PsDjMJChbHBQT/9A7o5USV22GXDLtlLAI
AZqw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnkMotFtbvcoVKhWCvvyETdk4uFiX/zKmbLPjKtm0Iqv5EIzBWZQmktYMRu9QckXo+egdpt
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.238.39 with SMTP id vh7mr9308152wjc.109.1438375063541;
Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:37:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.95.168 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:37:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55BBB32B.3080802@gmail.com>
References: <CABm2gDqPBPiDG1BUAipEsLfyE1VFyvdqdoxtYjkKvGDvBQ8qMg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAE-z3OVM8vwjo_-FOggSoOWR78w=Rmm+GS7Xv9uSK0jdx1_zdw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDrs6XwG5imH3pFFDB71kx2dSfhR7kjc6Pw8hvDKqGvTPQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAE-z3OVgQFaFAWUJhDLzyMAE2AXoGHTy0NbUADDAZW9-veX8XA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDrrqubbZ7MjDppu-eFxJGcydVoSAK2SC=-s-0txYX6GRQ@mail.gmail.com>
<55BBB32B.3080802@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 22:37:43 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDo=LKLhEh0AXBzifR8QDc2epQ8=uObBdskRyf0shShPzw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Thomas Kerin <thomas.kerin@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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-development] [BIP draft] Motivation and
deployment of consensus rules changes ([soft/hard]forks)
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: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 20:37:45 -0000
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Thomas Kerin via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I really think there should be a document before a BIP number is assigned.
There was a document from the start, but after I got the BIP number, I
was renaming the file, moving from org-mode to mediawiki and getting
the code ready.
I'm sorry, I broke the old link to the document, here's the new one:
https://github.com/jtimon/bips/blob/bip-forks/bip-0099.mediawiki
Maybe I should create a PR already to have a permanent link, I don't know.
As said in the document, the code is now here:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0.11...jtimon:hardfork-timewarp-0.11
Also, I should mention that one particular discussion related to this
BIP (whether we should use Block.nTime, median time or block.nHeight
for the activation thresholds) is being discussed in:
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-July/009731.html
The BIP is currently assuming that the preferred choice for all
non-emergency uncontroversial hardforks is defining a starting
block.nHeight after which miners start confirming their upgrade. Once
the 95% threshold is reached the hardfork takes effect.
Long after that, after that first block enforcing the new rules is
deeply buried, that check can simply replaced by re-defining the
threshold height not with the height when miners started voting, but
simply with the height in which the rules started being enforced for
the first time (see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5966/files
).
|
