From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 07:12:16 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.9.0-gentoo; KDE/4.10.2; x86_64; ; )
References: <20130519132359.GA12366@netbook.cypherspace.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130519132359.GA12366@netbook.cypherspace.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201305200712.19206.luke@dashjr.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] is there a way to do bitcoin-staging?
Precedence: list

This sounds similar to the "bitcoin2" branch I created a while back - 
basically a "next"-like branch, but for hardforking changes that refused to 
run without the -testnet option. There's so much non-hardforking code that can 
be written/tested, at this point, that I think it was and maybe is premature 
to be writing hardforking code outside of necessity. But perhaps if you want 
to play around, it might be a good starting point (it can probably merge up to 
latest master, and trivial to rebase if not).

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 1:23:59 PM Adam Back wrote:
> Is there a way to experiment with new features - eg committed coins - that
> doesnt involve an altcoin in the conventional sense, and also doesnt impose
> a big testing burden on bitcoin main which is a security and testing risk?
> 
> eg lets say some form of merged mine where an alt-coin lets call it
> bitcoin-staging?  where the coins are the same coins as on bitcoin, the
> mining power goes to bitcoin main, so some aspect of merged mining, but no
> native mining.  and ability to use bitcoins by locking them on bitcoin to
> move them to bitcoin-staging and vice versa (ie exchange them 1:1
> cryptographically, no exchange).
> 
> Did anyone figure anything like that out?  Seems vaguely doable and
> maybe productive.  The only people with coins at risk of defects in a new
> feature, or insufficiently well tested novel feature are people with coins
> on bitcoin-staging.
> 
> Yes I know about bitcoin-test this is not it.  I mean a real live system,
> with live value, but that is intentionally wanting to avoid forking
> bitcoins parameters, nor value, nor mindshare dillution.  In this way
> something potentially interesting could move forward faster, and be les
> risky to the main bitcoin network.  eg particularly defenses against
> 
> It might also be a more real world test test (after bitcoin-test) because
> some parameters are different on test, and some issues may not manifest
> without more real activity.
> 
> Then also bitcoin could cherry pick interesting patches and merge them
> after extensive real-world validation with real-money at stake (by early
> adopters).
> 
> Adam
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --- AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development