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
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2AA513D7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:29:38 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148095.authsmtp.com (outmail148095.authsmtp.com
[62.13.148.95])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC3141BF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 16 Sep 2015 22:29:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
by punt18.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t8GMTanJ070050;
Wed, 16 Sep 2015 23:29:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from muck (162-245-20-41.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net [162.245.20.41])
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t8GMTTKI006462
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Wed, 16 Sep 2015 23:29:32 +0100 (BST)
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:29:28 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150916222928.GC32688@muck>
References: <CADm_WcY8Vy+k+5BaBS+jV6D6tmSXrok8rAxoPxxKOzUhyPWgMg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="m51xatjYGsM+13rf"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CADm_WcY8Vy+k+5BaBS+jV6D6tmSXrok8rAxoPxxKOzUhyPWgMg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Server-Quench: 67aec0d8-5cc2-11e5-b399-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdwQUC1AEAgsB AmMbWVdeUlR7WmA7 agxTcwdZZ1RMXxtu
UVdMSlVNFUssCWt8 YnplKxlycQFAejB0 YkVmEHZcDREpdRJ1
X0sHRm8bZGY1bX1N U0lRagNUcgZDfk5E bwQuUz1vNG8XDSg5
AwQ0PjZ0MThBHWxR QwsGKlQJTEAQAyV0 ThYOVT8uAUYCRiN7
IxE4J1obBEMcNFl6 KUEmUl8DKHc8
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 162.245.20.41/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
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 development mailing list <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] libconsensus and bitcoin development process
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, 16 Sep 2015 22:29:38 -0000
--m51xatjYGsM+13rf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:10:37AM -0400, Jeff Garzik via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Refactors however have a very real negative impact.
> bitcoin/bitcoin.git is not only the source tree in the universe.
> Software engineers at home, at startups, and at major companies are
> maintaining branches of their own.
Incidentally, it'd help if we got some insight into why those branches
are being maintained; what features are in those branches that Bitcoin
Core doesn't have?
I've run into a number of cases where companies were maintaining forks
of Bitcoin Core unnecessarily, where a different, loosely coupled,
architecture could do what they needed to do without including the new
logic in the codebase itself.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000013137b1bd77e352d28fa36309be1c821180eda408bcb745c
--m51xatjYGsM+13rf
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQGrBAEBCACVBQJV+e1FXhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw
MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAxMzEzN2IxYmQ3N2UzNTJkMjhmYTM2MzA5YmUxYzgyMTE4
MGVkYTQwOGJjYjc0NWMvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0
ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQwIXyHOf0udzM4Qf9G4ZyWqzB9p9W/Jcqs2EVskJk
iBbcnlqkBLCTJS9zgsm7rMnp5Eoj56p4cIv0b74UA/8ts9PJA+y2NXBGL3LsmpCE
W/KbJFkOVSbKtxh2gTKx7xY8cCEFTIKL/xQoc0VGznO/XyB7Ue1hueIsb5yW4C0X
74hX5vHSWQne62DfYoX6AH5Umq+nt0CsHFBQYgx5yP8GlV8OKHTgGpM5/fFRB/Qk
B0S5uY9w0+SSNGHQQlS7VTgN3U9O4qEBxGEZnGRpwfxGtvI4mvF5iWiDprDjqLhy
a2lGicLe8+Q/l3AI0YQ5kJcpMa2eY+BshNXWP2UbGwqGLTdk8q0eqZBVktDWuw==
=RQeG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--m51xatjYGsM+13rf--
|
