MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: asperous2@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <201509042145.34410.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <64B72DF6-BE37-4624-ADAA-CE28C14A4227@gmail.com>
	<201509042101.11839.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAAxp-m8pgvHqUcmjCt6W5uscgb9ErtiTHdR0-nKU6OVdCE7rXA@mail.gmail.com>
	<201509042145.34410.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Andy Chase <theandychase@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 14:19:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAxp-m8JW-WOCem6a4RmBk7HOV3cCc02r5r=BkEDyUBu84u4=A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, gmaxwell@gmail.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1141ef3cd337ab051f0694d5
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP/Draft] BIP Acceptance Process
Precedence: list

--001a1141ef3cd337ab051f0694d5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Okay for sure yeah writing another proposal that reflects the current state
of affairs as people see it might provide some interesting perspective on
this proposal. I would welcome that.

Greg: With no other direct comments appearing to be inbound I'd like to
move forward with this one and get a number assigned to it. Thanks!

Thanks to all for the discussion!

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:

> On Friday, September 04, 2015 9:36:42 PM Andy Chase wrote:
> > I understand your concerns. What kinds of changes do you think should go
> > through a process like this? Just hard forks?
>
> The process loses meaning if it doesn't reflect reality. So only hardforks
> should go through the hardfork process; only softforks through the softfork
> process; etc. Trying to make one-size-fits-all just means de facto accepted
> BIPs wouldn't be recognised as such because nobody cares to meet the higher
> requirements.
>
> Luke
>

--001a1141ef3cd337ab051f0694d5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Okay for sure yeah writing another proposal that reflects =
the current state of affairs as people see it might provide some interestin=
g perspective on this proposal. I would welcome that.<div><br></div><div>Gr=
eg: With no other direct comments appearing to be inbound I&#39;d like to m=
ove forward with this one and get a number assigned to it. Thanks!</div><di=
v><br></div><div>Thanks to all for the discussion!</div></div><div class=3D=
"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:45 PM=
, Luke Dashjr <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:luke@dashjr.org" targ=
et=3D"_blank">luke@dashjr.org</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"><span class=3D"">On Friday, September 04, 2015 9:36:42 PM Andy C=
hase wrote:<br>
&gt; I understand your concerns. What kinds of changes do you think should =
go<br>
&gt; through a process like this? Just hard forks?<br>
<br>
</span>The process loses meaning if it doesn&#39;t reflect reality. So only=
 hardforks<br>
should go through the hardfork process; only softforks through the softfork=
<br>
process; etc. Trying to make one-size-fits-all just means de facto accepted=
<br>
BIPs wouldn&#39;t be recognised as such because nobody cares to meet the hi=
gher<br>
requirements.<br>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
Luke<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a1141ef3cd337ab051f0694d5--