Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of me.com
	designates 17.172.220.240 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=17.172.220.240; envelope-from=jeanpaulkogelman@me.com;
	helo=st11p02mm-asmtp005.mac.com; 
Content-type: multipart/signed;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_72645090-E274-444F-B179-1CD2637B1878";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>
In-reply-to: <CAAS2fgRu1j0w8RsiYutixEDxs1NYZVxQ7D7VRgDVi1b-wx+vUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 16:35:13 -0700
Message-id: <19909B49-0895-4130-99FB-9A116140CFE9@me.com>
References: <CAKLmikPZhhTs2rf5h52KHLrWB38S=JgiOc+pCPx0FXvT7c_aow@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgTcTKAA0Xdzk3xZ-3sWwoPgPGmQdugG-0jjhPmntXitfQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<38895569-E6E1-4576-9E36-B00B53F9D3CC@me.com>
	<201310192229.19932.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAAS2fgRu1j0w8RsiYutixEDxs1NYZVxQ7D7VRgDVi1b-wx+vUQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open
	source	community
Precedence: list


--Apple-Mail=_72645090-E274-444F-B179-1CD2637B1878
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii


On 2013-10-19, at 4:20 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
>> See BIP 1 for the process.. proposals go to this mailing list first.
>=20
> FWIW, he did post to the mailing list and he got an underwhelming =
response:
>=20
> =
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=3D20ec1e35-3051-4=
5d6-b449-e4a4d5c06dc8%40me.com&forum_name=3Dbitcoin-development

Although I agree that the number of responses on the mailing list was =
minimal, they were overall positive. Mike voiced concerns about not =
having a date field to limit the rescan when importing, but other than =
that, most of the discussion was on bitcointalk. I've made a number of =
revisions, trying to incorporate the suggestions that were given. =
Obviously this doesn't mean that the draft is final (specifically the =
KDF's that can be used is still up for debate and having 29 undefined =
ID's means it's reasonably future proof).

Having it on the BIP page doesn't make it any more official, I agree, =
but it does increase its exposure and will hopefully spark some more =
discussion.


jp

--Apple-Mail=_72645090-E274-444F-B179-1CD2637B1878
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
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=hi/8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_72645090-E274-444F-B179-1CD2637B1878--