summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/3a/782953abc29fd00f33442ce65bcb74c4c39cb6
blob: 284be11d85667b3d068db7d0ffd489691d8ee1f5 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE090F5B
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun, 27 Sep 2015 20:28:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail149095.authsmtp.com (outmail149095.authsmtp.com
	[62.13.149.95])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46EA6188
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun, 27 Sep 2015 20:28:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237])
	by punt15.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t8RKRxn6042121;
	Sun, 27 Sep 2015 21:27:59 +0100 (BST)
Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com
	[75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128)
	by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t8RKRtPv068708
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
	Sun, 27 Sep 2015 21:27:58 +0100 (BST)
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 16:27:55 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: jl2012@xbt.hk
Message-ID: <20150927202755.GA10332@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <20150927185031.GA20599@savin.petertodd.org>
	<be61cf188f4d277b947d8bd22a7ac3da@xbt.hk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <be61cf188f4d277b947d8bd22a7ac3da@xbt.hk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 3e2a1cd0-6556-11e5-9f76-002590a135d3
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
	http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
	aAdMdAUUC1AEAgsB AmMbWVVeUlp7XGs7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
	VklWR1pVCwQmRRRj fXxaMl9ycQ1BeHY+ YURjVj5YCUYrdBUp
	QlNSEGgAeGZhPWUC WRZfcR5UcAFPdx8U a1N6AHBDAzANdhEy
	HhM4ODE3eDlSNhEd ZgwRYklaTUsTGjkt DzojJWtyVWYlag4Q
	CzsNCWI9OWsvH38T H2poMf9/
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
	anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY!
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: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 20:28:02 -0000


--+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 04:26:12PM -0400, jl2012@xbt.hk wrote:
> +1 for deploying BIP65 immediately without further waiting. Agree
> with all Peter's points.

Thanks!

> By the way, is there any chance to backport it to 0.9? In the
> deployment of BIP66 some miners requested a backport to 0.9 and
> that's why we have 0.9.5.

I certainly could, though there's good reasons to move to v0.10.x; I'd
want to first hear from miners as to why they're still on v0.9.x

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000f8ed62397b82b10e56b9aea309fb18c37985d1405808c4f

--+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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==
=gLfu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI--