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
|
Return-Path: <ctpacia@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84456D20
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:51:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-qg0-f51.google.com (mail-qg0-f51.google.com
[209.85.192.51])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B198106
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:51:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by qgec40 with SMTP id c40so82175637qge.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 09 Dec 2015 06:51:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version
:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=gCmOzpljAR687yujdauO2/oxBxTJWv5OWd/XVGRkKYk=;
b=sdsKJrAtD7hivNLa6TMhYwn9X6qka75JHzpZMGIfb0FJH4858FA2/R1zgMsWI7t/Ef
tmIpUOYohco7KLRA7TwvXWMuD4U9IXzEo3tg8hQh+YxXpYAShm86ncJh2c7R1whq9mCx
PlNkHIYdgGfnnqQH+0mYVBtu0gdPyCpDGuQsPojEUHeG2d/VrcSO7rprrgWRCI1ydo1b
l/Z26FlQl0eaMruXCqDxJVZQo4OttTgzKMzNumxOREsJlE4fPorUNmA0Dp14PBGvR/6y
TDlTuLOQilz3klKKpIVEx9QBQjD1+pn5OFKub9yeFzzdhKiZJM9bjZ1iWzB2g1oSJseX
VLQg==
X-Received: by 10.140.17.213 with SMTP id 79mr7840542qgd.49.1449672698310;
Wed, 09 Dec 2015 06:51:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18d:8301:36e:6e29:95ff:fe0a:833b?
([2601:18d:8301:36e:6e29:95ff:fe0a:833b])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
l31sm3945956qge.22.2015.12.09.06.51.37
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Wed, 09 Dec 2015 06:51:37 -0800 (PST)
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CAAS2fgQyVs1fAEj+vqp8E2=FRnqsgs7VUKqALNBHNxRMDsHdVg@mail.gmail.com>
<20151208110752.GA31180@amethyst.visucore.com>
<CABm2gDpcek=u=Rpe68EMOq6M7Bji9J=s5VvoQWKRqaQDAP5kTw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T1wga3Tandoe2mVGSKdHJytHoc9Ko7HRm2SvJXABEFk9w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chris <ctpacia@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56683FF8.5070003@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 09:51:36 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T1wga3Tandoe2mVGSKdHJytHoc9Ko7HRm2SvJXABEFk9w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 16:13:33 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system.
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: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 14:51:39 -0000
On 12/08/2015 10:12 AM, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Why segwitness as a soft fork? Stuffing the segwitness merkle tree in
> the coinbase is messy and will just complicate consensus-critical code
> (as opposed to making the right side of the merkle tree in
> block.version=5 blocks the segwitness data).
Agreed. I thought the rule was no contentious hark forks. It seems
hardly anyone opposes this change and there seems to be widespread
agreement that the hardfork version would be much cleaner.
|
