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
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
|
Return-Path: <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CAB4481
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 7 Jan 2017 21:15:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-yw0-f179.google.com (mail-yw0-f179.google.com
[209.85.161.179])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15898CD
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 7 Jan 2017 21:15:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-yw0-f179.google.com with SMTP id a10so397374738ywa.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 07 Jan 2017 13:15:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=JgwgPXTgRoSC/mFK+66CQmqOkkmBD9zV0RJy7CY09Ak=;
b=ZIQxKvrxbio8z2EZX93Fgoi7ee9pyrFbtitnxNEUxgv2BPkAkXNytwco4UMa6RgdIh
3c1eN6wISLm/inA3py3Adqm2D2edMUiyTTKfc4N0Gr/tnlGJnjvTGDVy/iZgBd1PZ65o
GfMcmLfw/AkXKut0uEHdnUKQhVVK5Vvs0/0urciw0oIyamaN2m5dDZfwgJxVJNblEgvK
hhnQtvJh0uVYndRpqXE1k4QO/etQ4MTJZQ7ckM+5Dh8JMPqhY8+HXYl+mJkO4oB6EDPc
35p34X+KbSXjzbXNuiTAU2rxnwYelol29E4FsqJTaotua7cvx/tCAyIZmnmXVvJLJJFH
ruEg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=JgwgPXTgRoSC/mFK+66CQmqOkkmBD9zV0RJy7CY09Ak=;
b=RSz4CxyE8p30KZeRj83OsBibSMECRHE6LCybkB/cLzC0JkT+1RNgyZjzqyuRC37oto
xLCVp3KxqyyiwLByBquU9lj7CbP1q/IZpxDs8X7t/f77L/QPH6WJ0Wg9GG58xT2G9atx
2iiUL61QwtO4QZJBoN0onWuGSHEf3kTepnVDz6bZ3mUxc7d9makR4qnLxC1+B93DH3pl
lcjLOoFazm/Vn4YLRY1l5iK7/xVZ5/PiLh9JviksohnE46wFHgpce6RhNWPLpWTeBNqH
74j/u+4Z0NbFr34+C7kMW1n9214NrhTJbbRP1SZ+AbENlC8h76BYd1d4pc9sFuqmz++X
9uQw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXL0ZTCwSHanEkjBxebR4DE4C2WcExT2deQKdY0YfshaIuuV86bgfMMqTOftr9kkSfuUMn6Or5OJKBhpKQ==
X-Received: by 10.13.202.13 with SMTP id m13mr7905639ywd.251.1483823732156;
Sat, 07 Jan 2017 13:15:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.129.161.70 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Jan 2017 13:15:11 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAAcC9ysBJcSyMoTAuyFL+1D4m=-LZOgQF_pb4AFC5vpv-yMAHQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7169224.bI6Cz5OEL8@cherry>
<CABr1YTfc0BZ21-mwMohqo8_v8D1QnYiGB_SMeCLwFChY2MV_zA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAcC9ysBJcSyMoTAuyFL+1D4m=-LZOgQF_pb4AFC5vpv-yMAHQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 21:15:11 +0000
Message-ID: <CADJgMzvsizuxPCRKcVKA+SHxK0Dp92Bnw1xag+oUFLrvU6Lw7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Priest <cp368202@ohiou.edu>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114f1e5476eeb6054587a247
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM,
HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 07 Jan 2017 21:18:25 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Classic 1.2.0 released
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Sat, 07 Jan 2017 21:15:34 -0000
--001a114f1e5476eeb6054587a247
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
There actually isn't an activation threshold in Bitcoin Classic. The hard
fork rules are active the moment you install the software. As was noted,
there aren't any release notes, so you can be forgiven for not knowing that
BIP109 support was removed and the proposal rejected. Classic recently
adopted a new set of hard fork rules for which there is no written
specification.
Bitcoin software vendors should take great pains to document software
features and changes from version to version. Bitcoin Core for example,
always has extensive release notes, and a full changelog extracted from the
source code for each version. In the case of consensus rule change
proposals, we follow the BIPs process which exists to help ecosystem-wide
co-ordination. A detailed and complete specification allows others to
re-implement the BIP in their own software and also acts as part of the
consensus building process and peer review process.
There's nothing wrong with hard forks per se, and this list is certain a
good place to discuss proposals, but releasing hard fork software without
establishing community wide consensus and without clearly labelling your
product as such is just not cricket. If I may cast your attention back a
few weeks ago, Johnson Lau released a hard fork client _testnet_ as part of
his research project which was announced on this list. It was clearly
labelled. This Bitcoin Classic announcement was not clearly labelled (and
released on mainnet).
On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Chris Priest via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Bitcoin Classic only activates if 75% of the network adopts it. That
> is not irresponsible or dangerous. It would only be dangerous if it
> activates at 50%, because that would create a situation where its not
> clear which side of the fork has the most proof of work.
>
> On 1/7/17, Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Your release announcement does not make it clear that Bitcoin Classic is
> > incompatible with the current Bitcoin network and its consensus rules. It
> > is a hard fork on mainnet with no safe activation as well as including
> > other unsafe changes. There is also no BIP for the hard fork. There is
> also
> > no evidence of community wide consensus for such a hard fork. This is
> > dangerous and irresponsible.
> >
> >
> > It's wrong to announce software without correctly informing people about
> > the contents or risks. Furthermore, there are no release notes in
> > https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/tree/v1.2.0/doc nor
> > changelog. Without those, it is almost impossible for average users to
> know
> > what is under the hood or what has changed and time consuming for
> > developers to assess.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev <
> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Bitcoin Classic version 1.2.0 is now available from;
> >>
> >> <https://bitcoinclassic.com/gettingstarted.html>
> >>
> >> This is a new major version release, including new features, various
> >> bugfixes and performance improvements.
> >>
> >> This release marks a change in strategy for Bitcoin Classic, moving from
> >> the
> >> very conservative block size proposal based on compromise to one where
> >> Classic truly innovates and provides a long term solution for the market
> >> to
> >> choose and leave behind the restrictions of the old.
> >>
> >> The most visible change in this version is the decentralised block size
> >> solution where node operators decide on the maximum size.
> >>
> >> Bitcoin Classic is focused on providing users a way to get onto the
> >> Bitcoin
> >> network using a high quality validating node for a large set of use
> >> cases.
> >> Classic presents top notch quality processes in this release, to help
> >> anyone
> >> running Bitcoin.
> >>
> >> We include in this release various projects with the beta label. People
> >> who
> >> want to use the Classic node as an on-ramp to Bitcoin will find them
> >> interesting. These projects will need to be enabled in the config by
> >> those
> >> that want to test them.
> >>
> >> More background information on this release and Classic can be seen in
> >> this
> >> video: https://vimeo.com/192789752
> >> The full release notes are on github at
> >> https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/releases/tag/v1.2.0
> >>
> >> --
> >> Tom Zander
> >> Blog: https://zander.github.io
> >> Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--001a114f1e5476eeb6054587a247
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">There actually isn't an activation threshold in Bitcoi=
n Classic. The hard fork rules are active the moment you install the softwa=
re. As was noted, there aren't any release notes, so you can be forgive=
n for not knowing that BIP109 support was removed and the proposal rejected=
. Classic recently adopted a new set of hard fork rules for which there is =
no written specification.<div><br></div><div>Bitcoin software vendors shoul=
d take great pains to document software features and changes from version t=
o version. Bitcoin Core for example, always has extensive release notes, an=
d a full changelog extracted from the source code for each version. In the =
case of consensus rule change proposals, we follow the BIPs process which e=
xists to help ecosystem-wide co-ordination. A detailed and complete specifi=
cation allows others to re-implement the BIP in their own software and also=
acts as part of the consensus building process and peer review process.</d=
iv><div><br></div><div>There's nothing wrong with hard forks per se, an=
d this list is certain a good place to discuss proposals, but releasing har=
d fork software without establishing community wide consensus and without c=
learly labelling your product as such is just not cricket. If I may cast yo=
ur attention back a few weeks ago, Johnson Lau released a hard fork client =
_testnet_ as part of his research project which was announced on this list.=
It was clearly labelled. This Bitcoin Classic announcement was not clearly=
labelled (and released on mainnet).</div><div><br></div></div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 8:12=
PM, Chris Priest via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:b=
itcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.l=
inuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quot=
e" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">=
Bitcoin Classic only activates if 75% of the network adopts it. That<br>
is not irresponsible or dangerous. It would only be dangerous if it<br>
activates at 50%, because that would create a situation where its not<br>
clear which side of the fork has the most proof of work.<br>
<br>
On 1/7/17, Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev<br>
<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@l=
ists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>>=
; wrote:<br>
> Your release announcement does not make it clear that Bitcoin Classic =
is<br>
> incompatible with the current Bitcoin network and its consensus rules.=
It<br>
> is a hard fork on mainnet with no safe activation as well as including=
<br>
> other unsafe changes. There is also no BIP for the hard fork. There is=
also<br>
> no evidence of community wide consensus for such a hard fork. This is<=
br>
> dangerous and irresponsible.<br>
><br>
><br>
> It's wrong to announce software without correctly informing people=
about<br>
> the contents or risks. Furthermore, there are no release notes in<br>
> <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/tree/v1.2.=
0/doc" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/<wbr>bitcoin=
classic/bitcoinclassic/<wbr>tree/v1.2.0/doc</a> nor<br>
> changelog. Without those, it is almost impossible for average users to=
know<br>
> what is under the hood or what has changed and time consuming for<br>
> developers to assess.<br>
><br>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev <<br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@l=
ists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Bitcoin Classic version 1.2.0 is now available from;<br>
>><br>
>>=C2=A0 <<a href=3D"https://bitcoinclassic.com/gettingstarted.htm=
l" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://bitcoinclassic.com/<wbr>get=
tingstarted.html</a>><br>
>><br>
>> This is a new major version release, including new features, vario=
us<br>
>> bugfixes and performance improvements.<br>
>><br>
>> This release marks a change in strategy for Bitcoin Classic, movin=
g from<br>
>> the<br>
>> very conservative block size proposal based on compromise to one w=
here<br>
>> Classic truly innovates and provides a long term solution for the =
market<br>
>> to<br>
>> choose and leave behind the restrictions of the old.<br>
>><br>
>> The most visible change in this version is the decentralised block=
size<br>
>> solution where node operators decide on the maximum size.<br>
>><br>
>> Bitcoin Classic is focused on providing users a way to get onto th=
e<br>
>> Bitcoin<br>
>> network using a high quality validating node for a large set of us=
e<br>
>> cases.<br>
>> Classic presents top notch quality processes in this release, to h=
elp<br>
>> anyone<br>
>> running Bitcoin.<br>
>><br>
>> We include in this release various projects with the beta label. P=
eople<br>
>> who<br>
>> want to use the Classic node as an on-ramp to Bitcoin will find th=
em<br>
>> interesting. These projects will need to be enabled in the config =
by<br>
>> those<br>
>> that want to test them.<br>
>><br>
>> More background information on this release and Classic can be see=
n in<br>
>> this<br>
>> video: <a href=3D"https://vimeo.com/192789752" rel=3D"noreferrer" =
target=3D"_blank">https://vimeo.com/192789752</a><br>
>> The full release notes are on github at<br>
>> <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/releas=
es/tag/v1.2.0" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/<wbr=
>bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/<wbr>releases/tag/v1.2.0</a><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> Tom Zander<br>
>> Blog: <a href=3D"https://zander.github.io" rel=3D"noreferrer" targ=
et=3D"_blank">https://zander.github.io</a><br>
>> Vlog: <a href=3D"https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel" rel=
=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://vimeo.com/channels/<wbr>tomscrypt=
ochannel</a><br>
>> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
>> <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-d=
ev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
>> <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc=
oin-dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation=
.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
--001a114f1e5476eeb6054587a247--
|
