blob: 5dda5d29a8b4edf37f7bd0e1a6a8621a4df82ae2 (
plain)
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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <cryptocurrencies@quidecco.de>) id 1YF0co-0000PG-A2
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:19:42 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from quidecco.de ([81.169.136.15])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YF0cm-0007aX-PI
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:19:42 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by quidecco.de (Postfix) with SMTP id C9E6FE2A9B0;
Sat, 24 Jan 2015 14:19:34 +0100 (CET)
From: Isidor Zeuner <cryptocurrencies@quidecco.de>
To: Ross Nicoll <jrn@jrn.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <54BD7024.5070008@jrn.me.uk>
<CANEZrP3ZdFcQsP+EWgTYQDccFZbrZFTk+xi-YdWPCJzMRH79pA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <54BD7024.5070008@jrn.me.uk>
Message-Id: <20150124131934.C9E6FE2A9B0@quidecco.de>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 14:19:34 +0100 (CET)
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
X-Headers-End: 1YF0cm-0007aX-PI
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP70: why Google Protocol Buffers for
encoding?
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: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:19:42 -0000
> For what it's worth, there was consideration of replacing protocol
> buffers when modifying BIP70 to function with the altcoin I work on
> (changes were required anyway in eliminate any risk that payment
> requests could not be accidentally applied to the wrong blockchain).
Why not serialize some kind of blockchain identifier with the
messages? Arbitrarily deviating from a given design choice just for
the sake of doing it differently may serve the goal of creating more
overall code diversity, but would not necessarily serve the quality of
the blockchain network where it is done for.
Best regards,
Isidor
|
