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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1YqRF0-0001vT-Mm
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 19:13:50 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
designates 209.85.214.171 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.171; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f171.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f171.google.com ([209.85.214.171])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YqREz-0004pT-Pe
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 19:13:50 +0000
Received: by obblk2 with SMTP id lk2so39253348obb.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 07 May 2015 12:13:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
bh=HHuVFNk/PgwJySVbLEGcWd1/+H4vDpzFwUZolu0vfH4=;
b=RqmGWNQ6l9MSKLWGp705r5QfZgpnQdOqgUZOFeBxPFMbsKGGiSozKRxj1sACTqx0m7
Dk15x29NaDbJtSWpJ00s+fkn43dYpG94wN9h5iWuyyqll1ZMx1XU40zVIPK7BDz9wzDH
zlBUL1+4NERaO8kBcTKqhE7SycCPtXIquO3UgDtNiYOR/6Cb4fCVXeRc1UVF0gNCDDW/
ev5ALyZA07DRBEjSdWZni2gHUE2NcBDItGnchN0sYfdHv+emL6oxXNgSkqjqrytd02Oa
jL0yuW+1kT0evpvdW4kxopPA0SBhvAYWbyVpuErr4CdI0Rd19nQjv1cGvbFL/oKD25Dc
6Tyg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmn46pIp0Qil3kF9CQxpPfsjGurOl5TFraTW2q+xeHfpXUkBEytZCBOXqmya+nfNJ/AJfhq
X-Received: by 10.202.224.11 with SMTP id x11mr85595oig.33.1431026024194; Thu,
07 May 2015 12:13:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.202.108.149 with HTTP; Thu, 7 May 2015 12:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <554BB718.6070104@bluematt.me>
References: <554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me>
<CANEZrP3wGWHdz+ut6pvke5TJJsc1rTFt8sn2KziX35oL5LAsyg@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDpDvk2VsQ+mJ-BoeBKmvu9jBXNujZEFKuCStRNjFL6VOA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2zAGCCBhNa4=9yw+A_Dn5o4SQXoPTE_qcJzZ1dFuF2tw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqd6iHRUDKZWWTudcC1QkYa+rCuHjz7pMC2K1Db8wpgfA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP1CU0kB0vXeXUX1L8byaT-Zf2xg+3N+GeNthi_i6bn1qw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T2Nxvr4fqREMw3_LXftzsxrUAR1+9sVMa8_EpTnH1nN1Q@mail.gmail.com>
<554BA032.4040405@bluematt.me>
<CANEZrP3yM9wsSPNgpOsXDk-DjUy5PW2XuRTvK2AyCNbVJ5hZHw@mail.gmail.com>
<554BB718.6070104@bluematt.me>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 15:13:23 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0Pjet092XiEOBHgGyvRgdwmLnd1hVajS+SDgXa1BAojVw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Matt Corallo <bitcoin-list@bluematt.me>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d42e0d638b3051582b561
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
-0.1 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1YqREz-0004pT-Pe
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase
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: Thu, 07 May 2015 19:13:50 -0000
--001a113d42e0d638b3051582b561
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Matt Corallo <bitcoin-list@bluematt.me>
wrote:
> More generally, consider the situation we're in now. Gavin is going off
> pitching this idea to the general public (which, I agree, is an
> important step in pulling off a hardfork) while people who actually
> study the issues are left wondering why they're being ignored (ie why is
> there no consensus-building happening on this list?).
This sub-thread threatens to veer off into he-said-she-said.
> If, instead, there had been an intro on the list as "I think we should
> do the blocksize increase soon, what do people think?", the response
> could likely have focused much more around creating a specific list of
> things we should do before we (the technical community) think we are
> prepared for a blocksize increase.
Agreed, but that is water under the bridge at this point. You - rightly -
opened the topic here and now we're discussing it.
Mike and Gavin are due the benefit of doubt because making a change to a
leaderless automaton powered by leaderless open source software is breaking
new ground. I don't focus so much on how we got to this point, but rather,
where we go from here.
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
--001a113d42e0d638b3051582b561
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Matt Corallo <<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:bitcoin-list@bluematt.me">bitcoin-list@bluematt.me</a>> wr=
ote:<br>> More generally, consider the situation we're in now. Gavin=
is going off<br>> pitching this idea to the general public (which, I ag=
ree, is an<br>> important step in pulling off a hardfork) while people w=
ho actually<br>> study the issues are left wondering why they're bei=
ng ignored (ie why is<br>> there no consensus-building happening on this=
list?).<br><br></div>This sub-thread threatens to veer off into he-said-sh=
e-said.<br><div><br>> If, instead, there had been an intro on the list a=
s "I think we should<br>> do the blocksize increase soon, what do p=
eople think?", the response<br>> could likely have focused much mor=
e around creating a specific list of<br>> things we should do before we =
(the technical community) think we are<br>> prepared for a blocksize inc=
rease.<br><br></div><div>Agreed, but that is water under the bridge at this=
point.=C2=A0 You - rightly - opened the topic here and now we're discu=
ssing it.<br><br></div><div>Mike and Gavin are due the benefit of doubt bec=
ause making a change to a leaderless automaton powered by leaderless open s=
ource software is breaking new ground.=C2=A0 I don't focus so much on h=
ow we got to this point, but rather, where we go from here.<br></div><div><=
br>-- <br>Jeff Garzik<br>Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist<=
br>BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://bitpay.com/">https:/=
/bitpay.com/</a><br><br></div></div>
--001a113d42e0d638b3051582b561--
|
