Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WmO9A-0005sM-D5 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 May 2014 14:02:32 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.180 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.180; envelope-from=showard314@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f180.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com ([209.85.212.180]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WmO96-0005gv-Pl for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 May 2014 14:02:30 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hi2so4224987wib.13 for ; Mon, 19 May 2014 07:02:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.109.68 with SMTP id hq4mr30593194wjb.21.1400508142548; Mon, 19 May 2014 07:02:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.108.197 with HTTP; Mon, 19 May 2014 07:02:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 10:02:22 -0400 Message-ID: From: Scott Howard Cc: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) 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 (showard314[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (showard314[at]gmail.com) 1.2 MISSING_HEADERS Missing To: header -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 X-Headers-End: 1WmO96-0005gv-Pl Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 14:02:32 -0000 On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Ra=C3=BAl Mart=C3=ADnez w= rote: >> - bitcoind and Bitcoin Core should be in Linux repos: > > Agreed with conditions: > 1) The distro MUST let bitcoin devs dictate which dependent libs are > shipped with / built statically into the bitcoin binaries/libs. > 2) The distro MUST permit fresh updates even to older stable distros. > 2) The maintainer(s) MUST be active, and follow bitcoin development, > release status, etc. on a near-daily basis, be able to respond quickly > if security issues arise, etc. > > Matt C seems to do a good job of this in Ubuntu PPA, I'm told. Update: (1) and (3) are doable, however, Debian and Ubuntu policies make (2) very difficult (with the exception of security patches). Micha Bailey and I worked to get bitcoin removed from Debian and Ubuntu stable releases because they would not allow (2). There are other mechanisms that could accomplish (2) (backports, volatile, and updates repositories), however they are not enabled by default and require user intervention. Debian unstable does allow (2) since there is no release, and there is a package in Debian unstable. That package is blocked from transitioning to a stable release. We've also blacklisted it from Ubuntu so that Ubuntu doesn't just autoimport and release the Debian unstable package in an Ubuntu stable release. Micha is also working to have all old versions of bitcoin removed from previous released Ubuntu versions. Matt C's PPA is the best way of getting (1-3) above on Ubuntu, and the Debian unstable package is probably the best way of getting (1-3) above in Debian. Both require users to add a line to their apt sources list; the Debian package would also require apt pinning. Regards, Scott