summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorTier Nolan <tier.nolan@gmail.com>2015-05-29 15:09:20 +0100
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2015-05-29 14:09:26 +0000
commitdc9ac28c7f7efa0a871f23fb45709807ce71aac5 (patch)
treea2f00dab14480391b77712540ff6fc323c0f0d72
parent53ea3a6150db29074489fe47019f3a1e469a5c91 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-dc9ac28c7f7efa0a871f23fb45709807ce71aac5.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-dc9ac28c7f7efa0a871f23fb45709807ce71aac5.zip
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function
-rw-r--r--db/d455297c83af99902a0c9b5f312ec9b293d617128
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">&lt;<=
+a href=3D"mailto:gavinandresen@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gavinandresen@g=
+mail.com</a>&gt;</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 &quot;bigger blocks now&quot; movement is successful, I&#39;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&#39;d better start supporting bigger blocks o=
+r they&#39;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&#39;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--
+
+