Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D250225A for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 02:53:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pd0-f178.google.com (mail-pd0-f178.google.com [209.85.192.178]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FB9E10D for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 02:53:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pdbmi9 with SMTP id mi9so34426546pdb.3 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:53:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=9OAp9z0SV9D3joO6bvBpdFTasIGeNA8fR8aOYJbgmKQ=; b=Ha837lA4PJw3H1vVXDEEesqYZtBSl7WhdB7SAr/gTWu2eOE8nomcB1uwrhea+tF4ZZ YavFTO+jA3LYeEnWTrwjTepiW/Iojq0sdNGa0xMCT0TdD4eZWzcgFTKyAp9g23vO9E7k F2knf9ThV1BfXjz4WWcjZF6taItDNK9v/2QjNFQwDl10plVgfmHeRTMyTrZEyvWi8d1J 59QWd2/bA4XQuVrZG0z54Fxl2B+2o/An16mpI/VzoTKoPBrHMU6sDLnw38nA2qsaiQU6 5HYo19Bs02OaIcC5KiIdozo9XPxa3l48vxHXsKn2uNPnSyJlNt/US7qqiBZJZ1gH8Vjx vSxA== X-Received: by 10.70.95.230 with SMTP id dn6mr19839439pdb.30.1439952799089; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:53:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.107] (cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com. [76.167.237.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id pg9sm19568283pbb.60.2015.08.18.19.53.17 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\)) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_479852EB-A7FE-44B0-91D5-B46F752D3CD0"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5 From: Eric Lombrozo In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:53:16 -0700 Message-Id: References: To: Ahmed Zsales X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin is an experiment. Why don't we have an experimental hardfork? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 02:53:19 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_479852EB-A7FE-44B0-91D5-B46F752D3CD0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9F3A1162-C127-488E-944B-98BEB99A4241" --Apple-Mail=_9F3A1162-C127-488E-944B-98BEB99A4241 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As an aside, combining reward halving with block size limit doubling = would have probably been a good idea :) > On Aug 18, 2015, at 3:51 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev = wrote: >=20 > -> You need to take into account the reward halving, likely to be in = 3Q2016. Forks and reward halving at the same time would possibly be a = bad combination. >=20 > -> The original proposed date for the fork was December 2015. It was = pushed back to January as December is a busy period for a lot of people = and businesses. Likewise, June is a busy period for people. July / = August is a good period as it is quiet because people go on holiday. A = window of 2 months during holiday periods is better than starting in = June. January 2016 is better, mainly because of the excessive reward = halving chatter likely to be going on.. >=20 > .. > Proposal (parameters in ** are my recommendations but negotiable): >=20 > 1. Today, we all agree that some kind of block size hardfork will = happen on t1=3D*1 June 2016* >=20 > 2. If no other consensus could be reached before t2=3D*1 Feb 2016*, we = will adopt the backup plan >=20 > 3. The backup plan is: t3=3D*30 days* after m=3D*80%* of miner = approval, but not before t1=3D*1 June 2016*, the block size is increased = to s=3D*1.5MB* >=20 > 4. If the backup plan is adopted, we all agree that a better solution = should be found before t4=3D*31 Dec 2017*. > .. > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev --Apple-Mail=_9F3A1162-C127-488E-944B-98BEB99A4241 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii As an aside, combining reward halving with block size limit = doubling would have probably been a good idea :)

On = Aug 18, 2015, at 3:51 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

-> You need to take into account the reward halving, = likely to be in 3Q2016. Forks and reward halving at the same time would = possibly be a bad combination. 

-> The original proposed date for = the fork was December 2015. It was pushed back to January as December is = a busy period for a lot of people and businesses. Likewise, June is a = busy period for people. July / August is a good period as it is quiet = because people go on holiday. A window of 2 months during holiday = periods is better than starting in June. January 2016 is better, mainly = because of the excessive reward halving chatter likely to be going = on..

..
Proposal (parameters in ** are my recommendations but negotiable):

1. Today, we all agree that some kind of block size hardfork will happen = on t1=3D*1 June 2016*

2. If no other consensus could be reached before t2=3D*1 Feb 2016*, we = will adopt the backup plan

3. The backup plan is: t3=3D*30 days* after m=3D*80%* of miner approval, = but not before t1=3D*1 June 2016*, the block size is increased to = s=3D*1.5MB*

4. If the backup plan is adopted, we all agree that a better solution = should be found before t4=3D*31 Dec 2017*.
..
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev = mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev<= br class=3D"">

= --Apple-Mail=_9F3A1162-C127-488E-944B-98BEB99A4241-- --Apple-Mail=_479852EB-A7FE-44B0-91D5-B46F752D3CD0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJV0++cAAoJEJNAI64YFENUMHQQAKmM4JIR6JArnfjnPTkgdy+M zSvPmrdi6AAQ/zHgMvCwyntwiGthyUCICR7nl8DQy+ZOAYrCPecN99PqRiT13TID QbdF2iy0rC6X1r0aVbnQFfp9ikw5x3QOxb+TyR+JiVsjCZbWEH8V2Q5hu7alrUNO WS7cfHfBdDbus/VorMMNevWttPpOJNhw4IcnLM2CSzBvWkY0oWAc2MYDMsOWVkq6 He1Qa7StZxk6D529usoc2YKGLZt62kjlfcA8CAkUqyCpR4MxcvMz/puulEHcyZ49 w/pFGKKiJXAgDa+Z7dQ7o9Wpl/BqrsMUO2tFJu9of2IinYuD3YGhuaK5ZGontbvl 5dVqjChG4X/QitIA0PdJ6htUkC0EhPqlZxjTMyzWhfEIDaOxYwcZo7e+qg1pgA1t ZGh2FsdY+ZdvBh+GhQB/AUlsJCN7nttAuCTmaP2b3SvgI/tLviZ90Qv9A4Xgrlpi BDeb740Kwf+duVk2mFvpVIq8q/PXdmC0uJsD/KV5SKgbfg5X5dTWRXoGblQ691D3 M0QVmf/3mqleyW348p08GHyJZ/4IFC5kwqTVZwX33Xpndl9yHwjvYX7Fc61ijmmv JoAtIefdydH8MoD5fnITfwAFho5g57ZwaPVWpuJWDzIXaIg3xUHsIsg8/YK64ifN rWl2ER+d+4m0+OtpnpkB =wuZR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_479852EB-A7FE-44B0-91D5-B46F752D3CD0--