path: root/04/da9d7a43c7c154be32e895131e6289de310cf8

Return-Path: <digitsu@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 756731E67
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu,  1 Oct 2015 10:25:59 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-qg0-f44.google.com (mail-qg0-f44.google.com
	[209.85.192.44])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD87C87
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu,  1 Oct 2015 10:25:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by qgev79 with SMTP id v79so59504387qge.0
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:subject
	:content-type; bh=IYkFiecQdWI2EQalVHaMG7Ulgeh/DxhDz314oq6DcNI=;
	b=nQTFjZvFYB1Aw9EnleOFhSEr7fRrcQ80YvR3ZeRKroONVAUtg1AqTr1dsLGifJse6G
	kYxPNErJfHPHr9oo+duNQKBaPr4im2/W078oC7EhnwGIq+VivSAol0qgbXtVdtlM6+an
	e900VGqWusTfkeQK1w9cRFMoMwCd74rLqwZ/CiDF9EDxM73oDDxJWbILURJ0GjQI5GSm
	6UcN5yIxyO95TKKYZ1kSZBd86n3BFGBRkaU6DA4qEyQ3BgRPoK/np+eH96JMQeP0V0bs
	Yl0uoD1PWTTlKRuNVtf3ClRuWduEo9dxbUAYTe5DyDaFkFJYZD0QMiT1AN0UptpBsG97
	2oNg==
X-Received: by 10.140.85.135 with SMTP id n7mr10633575qgd.53.1443695156895;
	Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hedwig-18.prd.orcali.com
	(ec2-54-85-253-144.compute-1.amazonaws.com. [54.85.253.144])
	by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b91sm2124086qge.8.2015.10.01.03.25.56
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
	(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-Original-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:25:56 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Nodemailer (0.5.0; +http://www.nodemailer.com/)
Message-Id: <1443695156118.ad4bc1ee@Nodemailer>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.748.1443693419.1627.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <mailman.748.1443693419.1627.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
X-Orchestra-Oid: 9DF71B7C-840E-4FB5-B5BD-05CD7B74CCA3
X-Orchestra-Sig: 164c79f85cef3ae0bbecd4149bdba41bed6c1651
X-Orchestra-Thrid: TD56C876D-E76D-40BE-ACDA-81C322724964_1513822300518443099
X-Orchestra-Thrid-Sig: 8e42e6e9aecb21b76c0a4c25b5eca7ceb38d80d0
X-Orchestra-Account: 6a0e7c82210c410d0fed500a1873b2ff66cab8ef
From: digitsu@gmail.com
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323"
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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:25:59 -0000

------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0

;-)




---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>

Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00

Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule

To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>







I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0




I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.


















=E2=80=94
Regards,

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM, null
<bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to
> 	bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	bitcoin-dev-owner@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than =22Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest...=22
> Today's Topics:
>    1. Re: Design Competition (odinn)
>    2. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
>       (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
>    3. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
>    4. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Btc Drak)
>    5. Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
>    6. Re: Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
>       (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:38:50 +0000
> From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>
> To: Richard Olsen <richard.olsen@lykkex.com>, 	bitcoin-dev
> 	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition
> Message-ID: <560CB8DA.6060801@riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dwindows-1252
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> Grosses me out that you have enforced KYC as part of what you are
> doing for anyone who would decide to get involved:
> https://wiki.lykkex.com/=3Fid=3Dstart#lykke=5Fcitizens
> Good luck with that, I'm sure not going to be a part of it, and I
> recommend that no-one else does either.
> - - O
> Richard Olsen via bitcoin-dev:
>> All,
>>=20
>> We are looking for participants in a Bitcoin related competition:
>> the aim is to build a trading platform (initially for foreign
>> exchange, other assets will follow) which lets participants settle
>> their trades through the blockchain via coloured coins. To
>> facilitate a quicker trade reconciliation, the use of a sidechain
>> is a suggestion but by no means a requirement. There will be an
>> online briefing event today where we will outline the requirements
>> in more detail, though much of it we have posted on our website
>> www.lykkex.com .
>>=20
>> As we want this to be a community driven effort rather than
>> something turning into a proprietary technology, all contributions
>> will be made available under a MIT license on Github.
>>=20
>> I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing
>> event or over email,
>>=20
>> Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F =
bitcoin-dev mailing
>> list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org=20
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>=20
> - --=20
> http://abis.io ~
> =22a protocol concept to enable decentralization
> and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good=22
> https://keybase.io/odinn
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z
> c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/
> Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP
> ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG
> ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt
> KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=3D
> =3D41DC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> ------------------------------
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200
> From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com>
> To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> 	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID: <20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan =
via=20
>> bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> > 2015-12-01
>> > -----------
>> > - Feature freeze
>>=20
>> Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until after=
 the HK=20
>> workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled it =
from the=20
>> release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for =
it=20
>> too)=3F
> In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code changes will=
 no longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.=20
> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK workshop =
I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code =
makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to decouple =
consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
> We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this change needs=
 to make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a =
time-based instead of feature-based release schedule.
> We can always do a 0.12.1.
> Wladimir
> ------------------------------
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:59 +0200
> From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
> To: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> 	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAAUq486=3DTisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV=5FKKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ@mail.gmail.=
com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22
> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer =
spec=3F
> 2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
>> > On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan =
via
>> > bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> > > 2015-12-01
>> > > -----------
>> > > - Feature freeze
>> >
>> > Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until =
after the HK
>> > workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled it =
from
>> the
>> > release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for=
 it
>> > too)=3F
>>
>> In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code changes =
will no
>> longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.
>>
>> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK =
workshop
>> I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code
>> makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to =
decouple
>> consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
>>
>> We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this change =
needs to
>> make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a =
time-based
>> instead of feature-based release schedule.
>>
>> We can always do a 0.12.1.
>>
>> Wladimir
>> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/=
20151001/5dca9e61/attachment-0001.html>
> ------------------------------
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:17:52 +0100
> From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
> To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> 	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> 	<CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n=5FajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=3Dw=3DrLhmOkJhfQg@mail.gmail.=
com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer =
spec=3F
>>
> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance =
releases
> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/=
20151001/dc91562f/attachment-0001.html>
> ------------------------------
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200
> From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
> To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> 	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
> Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
> I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.
> 2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>:
>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer =
spec=3F
>>>
>>
>> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance =
releases
>> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/=
20151001/17164b7e/attachment-0001.html>
> ------------------------------
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:56:55 +0200
> From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com>
> To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> 	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID: <20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:
>> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
> I'll interpret the question as =22why is the Bitcoin Core software still =
<1.0.0=22. Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the =
block/transaction versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest =
network protocol version is 70011.=20
> Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They =
just count up, every half year.
> Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature =
enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all of =
which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing a =
number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.
> Wladimir
> ------------------------------
> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2
> *****************************************
------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


<div>Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0</div>
<div>;-)</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>---------- Forwarded message ----------</div>
<div>From: Marcel Jamin &lt;marcel@jamin.net&gt;</div>
<div>Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00</div>
<div>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule</div>
<div>To: Btc Drak &lt;btcdrak@gmail.com&gt;</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is &lt;1.0.=
0</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div class=3D=22mailbox=5Fsignature=22>
<br>=E2=80=94
Regards, </div>
<br><br><div class=3D=22gmail=5Fquote=22><p>On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM,=
 bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org <span dir=3D=22ltr=22>&lt;<a=
 href=3D=22mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org=22 =
target=3D=22=5Fblank=22>bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.=
org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br></p><blockquote class=3D=22gmail=5Fquote=22 =
style=3D=22margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;=
=22><p>Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to
<br>	bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
<br><br>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
<br>	https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
<br>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
<br>	bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org
<br><br>You can reach the person managing the list at
<br>	bitcoin-dev-owner@lists.linuxfoundation.org
<br><br>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more =
specific
<br>than =22Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest...=22
<br><br><br>Today's Topics:
<br><br>   1. Re: Design Competition (odinn)
<br>   2. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
<br>      (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
<br>   3. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
<br>   4. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Btc Drak)
<br>   5. Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
<br>   6. Re: Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
<br>      (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
<br><br><br>---------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
<br><br>Message: 1
<br>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:38:50 +0000
<br>From: odinn &lt;odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net&gt;
<br>To: Richard Olsen &lt;richard.olsen@lykkex.com&gt;, 	bitcoin-dev
<br>	&lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt;
<br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition
<br>Message-ID: &lt;560CB8DA.6060801@riseup.net&gt;
<br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dwindows-1252
<br><br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
<br>Hash: SHA512
<br><br>Grosses me out that you have enforced KYC as part of what you are
<br>doing for anyone who would decide to get involved:
<br><br>https://wiki.lykkex.com/=3Fid=3Dstart#lykke=5Fcitizens
<br><br>Good luck with that, I'm sure not going to be a part of it, and I
<br>recommend that no-one else does either.
<br><br>- - O
<br><br>Richard Olsen via bitcoin-dev:
<br>&gt; All,
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; We are looking for participants in a Bitcoin related competition:
<br>&gt; the aim is to build a trading platform (initially for foreign
<br>&gt; exchange, other assets will follow) which lets participants =
settle
<br>&gt; their trades through the blockchain via coloured coins. To
<br>&gt; facilitate a quicker trade reconciliation, the use of a sidechain
<br>&gt; is a suggestion but by no means a requirement. There will be an
<br>&gt; online briefing event today where we will outline the =
requirements
<br>&gt; in more detail, though much of it we have posted on our website
<br>&gt; www.lykkex.com .
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; As we want this to be a community driven effort rather than
<br>&gt; something turning into a proprietary technology, all =
contributions
<br>&gt; will be made available under a MIT license on Github.
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing
<br>&gt; event or over email,
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
 bitcoin-dev mailing
<br>&gt; list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org=20
<br>&gt; https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
<br>&gt;=20
<br><br>- --=20
<br>http://abis.io ~
<br>=22a protocol concept to enable decentralization
<br>and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good=22
<br>https://keybase.io/odinn
<br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br><br>iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z
<br>c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/
<br>Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP
<br>ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG
<br>ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt
<br>KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=3D
<br>=3D41DC
<br>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br><br><br>------------------------------
<br><br>Message: 2
<br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200
<br>From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 &lt;laanwj@gmail.com&gt;
<br>To: Luke Dashjr &lt;luke@dashjr.org&gt;
<br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<br>	&lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt;
<br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
<br>Message-ID: &lt;20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com&gt;
<br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8
<br><br>On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
<br>&gt; On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der =
Laan via=20
<br>&gt; bitcoin-dev wrote:
<br>&gt; &gt; 2015-12-01
<br>&gt; &gt; -----------
<br>&gt; &gt; - Feature freeze
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until=
 after the HK=20
<br>&gt; workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled=
 it from the=20
<br>&gt; release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update=
 for it=20
<br>&gt; too)=3F
<br><br>In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code =
changes will no longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.=20
<br><br>I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK =
workshop I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before =
code makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to =
decouple consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
<br><br>We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this change=
 needs to make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a=
 time-based instead of feature-based release schedule.
<br><br>We can always do a 0.12.1.
<br><br>Wladimir
<br><br><br>------------------------------
<br><br>Message: 3
<br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:59 +0200
<br>From: Marcel Jamin &lt;marcel@jamin.net&gt;
<br>To: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 &lt;laanwj@gmail.com&gt;
<br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<br>	&lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt;
<br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
<br>Message-ID:
<br>	&lt;CAAUq486=3DTisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV=5FKKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ@mail.gmail=
.com&gt;
<br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22
<br><br>Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer =
spec=3F
<br><br>2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev=
 &lt;
<br>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt;:
<br><br>&gt; On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
<br>&gt; &gt; On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van =
der Laan via
<br>&gt; &gt; bitcoin-dev wrote:
<br>&gt; &gt; &gt; 2015-12-01
<br>&gt; &gt; &gt; -----------
<br>&gt; &gt; &gt; - Feature freeze
<br>&gt; &gt;
<br>&gt; &gt; Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off =
until after the HK
<br>&gt; &gt; workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we =
de-coupled it from
<br>&gt; the
<br>&gt; &gt; release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an =
update for it
<br>&gt; &gt; too)=3F
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code =
changes will no
<br>&gt; longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK =
workshop
<br>&gt; I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before =
code
<br>&gt; makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to =
decouple
<br>&gt; consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this =
change needs to
<br>&gt; make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a =
time-based
<br>&gt; instead of feature-based release schedule.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; We can always do a 0.12.1.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; Wladimir
<br>&gt; =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=

<br>&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list
<br>&gt; bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
<br>&gt; https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
<br>&gt;
<br>-------------- next part --------------
<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
<br>URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachm=
ents/20151001/5dca9e61/attachment-0001.html&gt;
<br><br>------------------------------
<br><br>Message: 4
<br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:17:52 +0100
<br>From: Btc Drak &lt;btcdrak@gmail.com&gt;
<br>To: Marcel Jamin &lt;marcel@jamin.net&gt;
<br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<br>	&lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt;
<br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
<br>Message-ID:
<br>	&lt;CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n=5FajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=3Dw=3DrLhmOkJhfQg@mail.=
gmail.com&gt;
<br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22
<br><br>On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev &lt;
<br>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt; wrote:
<br><br>&gt; Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the =
SemVer spec=3F
<br>&gt;
<br><br>We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance =
releases
<br>are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
<br>-------------- next part --------------
<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
<br>URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachm=
ents/20151001/dc91562f/attachment-0001.html&gt;
<br><br>------------------------------
<br><br>Message: 5
<br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200
<br>From: Marcel Jamin &lt;marcel@jamin.net&gt;
<br>To: Btc Drak &lt;btcdrak@gmail.com&gt;
<br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<br>	&lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt;
<br>Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
<br>Message-ID:
<br>	&lt;CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg@mail.gmail.=
com&gt;
<br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22
<br><br>---------- Forwarded message ----------
<br>From: Marcel Jamin &lt;marcel@jamin.net&gt;
<br>Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
<br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
<br>To: Btc Drak &lt;btcdrak@gmail.com&gt;
<br><br><br>I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is &lt;1.0.=
0
<br><br>I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.
<br><br>2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak &lt;btcdrak@gmail.com&gt;:
<br><br>&gt; On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev =
&lt;
<br>&gt; bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt; wrote:
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;&gt; Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the =
SemVer spec=3F
<br>&gt;&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance =
releases
<br>&gt; are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
<br>&gt;
<br>-------------- next part --------------
<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
<br>URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachm=
ents/20151001/17164b7e/attachment-0001.html&gt;
<br><br>------------------------------
<br><br>Message: 6
<br>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:56:55 +0200
<br>From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 &lt;laanwj@gmail.com&gt;
<br>To: Marcel Jamin &lt;marcel@jamin.net&gt;
<br>Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<br>	&lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt;
<br>Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
<br>Message-ID: &lt;20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com&gt;
<br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8
<br><br>On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:
<br>&gt; I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is &lt;1.0.0
<br><br>I'll interpret the question as =22why is the Bitcoin Core software =
still &lt;1.0.0=22. Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the =
block/transaction versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest =
network protocol version is 70011.=20
<br><br>Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. =
They just count up, every half year.
<br><br>Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software =
mature enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all =
of which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing =
a number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.
<br><br>Wladimir
<br><br><br>------------------------------
<br><br>=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=

<br>bitcoin-dev mailing list
<br>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
<br>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
<br><br><br>End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2
<br>*****************************************
<br></p></blockquote></div><br>
------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323--