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
|
Return-Path: <truthcoin@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 303A2B6D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:27:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-qt0-f171.google.com (mail-qt0-f171.google.com
[209.85.216.171])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C60C5406
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:27:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qt0-f171.google.com with SMTP id i2so5263967qta.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 11 Jul 2017 15:27:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent
:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language;
bh=Wxz0AHbQpAlNtX6TLTMyqb4cFnFZ4g8uXqfHb5bS7q4=;
b=L9BRHLsfCw6EftX5fOoY5ZM11xPQIFeNXFQWfrtASIQF4IGVv3W7w1IX3JtUSskq2K
THSk+ZSJN6OKXvkl5mV08rRj6P66aw7UjNtWKMEeuypHvfcyIxv4PPuBCP8BBgbIe7un
SqgSks+yGp0M9Ev3rcMi6Z15MV1bAe0rlQkP61/lB7N7jbBu+r/ZwGudPfetdaEsnK6D
Gr7GHz8w/icth4dDrIyzts2HpO4Hhe/vK1g4v+ESIMb57fnOZWPm51coqUQLVzKKwPBG
iNKs7FdRjQhKFB3iJg4mBgR/Wzq8iDIczDk3s7uxIq0jMiCk7lIP3WZ3sZlZh+YF8vMp
ABmw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date
:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding
:content-language;
bh=Wxz0AHbQpAlNtX6TLTMyqb4cFnFZ4g8uXqfHb5bS7q4=;
b=mBT9rMRo21xdYXe+e3m6a4mpO1Lj1Hrw3epA7T8I5D/qxWl1Z2FBKSvHeBhKKECcIU
+dqOQnY5Bjk2ixpsjl5IMP2TQQ7MP9Gr7f4Pxm8zMYIoFcMoKsDhRQ/fd8tX26ML436L
ecuAC/7D6dgd7h27qpvcGong3ZSMyh37pNGEhCqYAtBmrSMv/Q032nILuuoi8bDettYG
wUtdKtkE4WQlTlGhltrBPuQ0ahDwqI5mc8J+LfL+8tqOfFYthCllxmh5aFaMi0AAMEQV
GpLS+SPHeA4bYv/ATRKtH5jpsb1nc0r5onhnHaKjlQo0kIlDmkOYYhIOnCNRp7GaD46b
+EVA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw11236zuULUrjPgYnfPxaUJCee0tfWxiHH5ojDYSvBAlbAyhi2/ko
PcP/aHwPu7BVFg==
X-Received: by 10.237.56.73 with SMTP id j67mr2918919qte.51.1499812074020;
Tue, 11 Jul 2017 15:27:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.104] (ool-45726efb.dyn.optonline.net.
[69.114.110.251]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id
u30sm452454qtc.68.2017.07.11.15.27.52
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Tue, 11 Jul 2017 15:27:52 -0700 (PDT)
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <0119661e-a11a-6d4b-c9ec-fd510bd4f144@gmail.com>
<CAGL6+mHQZ3UP10msk65OO+Uk0hn7j+dkmJap_M7FgWfSZaYYJQ@mail.gmail.com>
<f79b9693-b8a5-c496-9dd9-d74704855d0e@gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgSEZDmgGBxB-ZNqC0NpWQCJSL9xnbaNQFud=sW0Fdgu8w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Paul Sztorc <truthcoin@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e226ba27-5f5e-f4d5-8d2d-9b4206a27d05@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 18:27:56 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSEZDmgGBxB-ZNqC0NpWQCJSL9xnbaNQFud=sW0Fdgu8w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM 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: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 00:37:51 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Updating the Scaling Roadmap
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: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:27:55 -0000
On 7/11/2017 5:31 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Paul Sztorc via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> I wrote the roadmap to try to be representative of a Core / developer
>> position.
> A fine intention, but I've checked with many of the top contributors
> and it sounds like the only regular developer you spoke with was
> Luke-Jr. Next time you seek to represent someone you might want to
> try talking to them!
That is false. I could provide a list of names but I'm really not sure
what would be gained as result. You yourself admit that it is an
excellent list of research, almost all which you support directly.
So I think your only real objection is that I didn't talk to you
specifically.
>> I am philosophically against hard forks, but HFs were in the end
>> of the previous roadmap so I felt it should stay. And, I felt that if =
I
> I think the project is not philosophically against hardforks, at least
> not in an absolute sense.
That is why I included them despite being personally against them.
> But if you were instead to talk about things like fixing timewarp,
> recovering header bits, etc. It would clearly be the other way.
It links to bitcoinhardforkresearch.github.io , which I assumed would
contain the hard fork wishlist somewhere, but perhaps it does not.
> In any case, I think it's safe to say that people's opinions on
> hardforks are complicated. And all the smoke right now with unusually
> poorly executed proposals probably clouds clear thinking.
Yes, of course. But is your position that if something is complicated we
should not try to clarify it?
|
