diff options
author | Tier Nolan <tier.nolan@gmail.com> | 2015-05-29 15:09:20 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-05-29 14:09:26 +0000 |
commit | dc9ac28c7f7efa0a871f23fb45709807ce71aac5 (patch) | |
tree | a2f00dab14480391b77712540ff6fc323c0f0d72 | |
parent | 53ea3a6150db29074489fe47019f3a1e469a5c91 (diff) | |
download | pi-bitcoindev-dc9ac28c7f7efa0a871f23fb45709807ce71aac5.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-dc9ac28c7f7efa0a871f23fb45709807ce71aac5.zip |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function
-rw-r--r-- | db/d455297c83af99902a0c9b5f312ec9b293d617 | 128 |
1 files changed, 128 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/db/d455297c83af99902a0c9b5f312ec9b293d617 b/db/d455297c83af99902a0c9b5f312ec9b293d617 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b2515824a --- /dev/null +++ b/db/d455297c83af99902a0c9b5f312ec9b293d617 @@ -0,0 +1,128 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <tier.nolan@gmail.com>) id 1YyKyU-0005hv-JE + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Fri, 29 May 2015 14:09:26 +0000 +Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com + designates 209.85.216.178 as permitted sender) + client-ip=209.85.216.178; envelope-from=tier.nolan@gmail.com; + helo=mail-qc0-f178.google.com; +Received: from mail-qc0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]) + by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) + (Exim 4.76) id 1YyKyT-00070t-Pb + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Fri, 29 May 2015 14:09:26 +0000 +Received: by qcxw10 with SMTP id w10so26389677qcx.3 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Fri, 29 May 2015 07:09:20 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.140.132.17 with SMTP id 17mr10444358qhe.36.1432908560347; + Fri, 29 May 2015 07:09:20 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.140.85.241 with HTTP; Fri, 29 May 2015 07:09:20 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T23r_y2R9OEgqb3AAZf47Hh8BUJncjxxmPp5v_9uKEiqQ@mail.gmail.com> +References: <16096345.A1MpJQQkRW@crushinator> + <CABsx9T3-zxCAagAS0megd06xvG5n-3tUL9NUK9TT3vt7XNL9Tg@mail.gmail.com> + <CANEZrP3VCaFsW4+gPm2kCJ9z7oVUZYVaeNf=_cJWEWwh4ZxiPQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CABsx9T21zjHyO-nh1aSBM3z4Bg015O0rOfYq7=Sy4mf=QxUVQA@mail.gmail.com> + <CANEZrP2BaKwhpPgcUHWAHswOmUeFLgEk4ysrn4+73qNzWDJ=yQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CABsx9T3nCJ-w_v-yEbEE2Ytb+xC65mhYqhoAhoOHw9tkPpG0TA@mail.gmail.com> + <CANEZrP1qH+zucYsGrMgnfi99e61Edxaj+xm=u_xYXga1g0WzJQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CAE-z3OVmw+0doCe0hmYE6A1D61h0AUh4Mtnf5Fg1e4zQBkpraQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CANEZrP0psA7hcJdKdA-r01UEt7ig3O-9vjwBMqKSEq-csu0hPQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CABsx9T23r_y2R9OEgqb3AAZf47Hh8BUJncjxxmPp5v_9uKEiqQ@mail.gmail.com> +Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 15:09:20 +0100 +Message-ID: <CAE-z3OXEGcUYYAsqqrVMQw=XA=5dt9u7XHDmuzhMJ8OkZ+k3yg@mail.gmail.com> +From: Tier Nolan <tier.nolan@gmail.com> +Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c07c72bc38ab0517390518 +X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++) +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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider + (tier.nolan[at]gmail.com) + -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record + 1.2 MISSING_HEADERS Missing To: header + 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 + 2.7 MALFORMED_FREEMAIL Bad headers on message from free email service + -0.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address +X-Headers-End: 1YyKyT-00070t-Pb +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step + function +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: Fri, 29 May 2015 14:09:26 -0000 + +--001a11c07c72bc38ab0517390518 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 + +On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com> +wrote: + +> But if there is still no consensus among developers but the "bigger blocks +> now" movement is successful, I'll ask for help getting big miners to do the +> same, and use the soft-fork block version voting mechanism to (hopefully) +> get a majority and then a super-majority willing to produce bigger blocks. +> The purpose of that process is to prove to any doubters that they'd better +> start supporting bigger blocks or they'll be left behind, and to give them +> a chance to upgrade before that happens. +> + +How do you define that the movement is successful? + +For + + +> Because if we can't come to consensus here, the ultimate authority for +> determining consensus is what code the majority of merchants and exchanges +> and miners are running. +> + +The measure is miner consensus. How do you intend to measure +exchange/merchant acceptance? + +--001a11c07c72bc38ab0517390518 +Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo= +te">On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Gavin Andresen <span dir=3D"ltr"><<= +a href=3D"mailto:gavinandresen@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gavinandresen@g= +mail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style= +=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir= +=3D"ltr"><div></div><div>But if there is still no consensus among developer= +s but the "bigger blocks now" movement is successful, I'll as= +k for help getting big miners to do the same, and use the soft-fork block v= +ersion voting mechanism to (hopefully) get a majority and then a super-majo= +rity willing to produce bigger blocks. The purpose of that process is to pr= +ove to any doubters that they'd better start supporting bigger blocks o= +r they'll be left behind, and to give them a chance to upgrade before t= +hat happens.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>How do you define = +that the movement is successful?<br></div><br>For <br></div><div class=3D"g= +mail_quote"><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"mar= +gin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr= +"><div>Because if we can't come to consensus here, the ultimate authori= +ty for determining consensus is what code the majority of merchants and exc= +hanges and miners are running.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>= +The measure is miner consensus.=C2=A0 How do you intend to measure exchange= +/merchant acceptance?<br></div></div></div></div> + +--001a11c07c72bc38ab0517390518-- + + |