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
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
|
Return-Path: <elombrozo@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DE21CA2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:52:57 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com
[209.85.220.41])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0EB4138
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:52:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id cy9so31716138pac.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:52:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=from:content-type:subject:date:message-id:to:mime-version;
bh=ODrWL5Wo2DjDOVom04YouW6JHSmeWXZpTBFIzBFrI1s=;
b=0M9mpRBHKCoVYrBeRlgarZgWQCJwH/WlqJO8wVMbubfkuhWwQD4s1tRgiRZb1XipgY
8wBbu0ScHz0V5XSTvxvShRFsu1W8eLVdmpUSdakdxjOoco4l+uHt5FJ9/yP8OEjHGjtd
EB0D5UYar525uFC72bSkJR8+hNwwkVkFs063URsYYkkpOMJxcmh3SQuuiUnjzMQ/B75v
c2twNrMYHhM4xsESh1OZveIWyfYcIhvoQfxN1d4Q5o9HDI8LTw5S7GE6e0MWGt0rVB4m
xK9a/kgHTvkoLTRM6G1BJjl9j7wZqH6RslEWAy3cvz2TxdDzFiRvNXMsw41FMzkGaei0
zb9g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:subject:date:message-id:to
:mime-version;
bh=ODrWL5Wo2DjDOVom04YouW6JHSmeWXZpTBFIzBFrI1s=;
b=GpsfIu6GYaNdD57aJDk3XMOzE6TfrVoUG0BA4TLzj7/DJErortopLCwlFr2/d6wBd4
tlSliGWntXhWMCGYsdS60XA/w5FoZAavhwQHRzlfKG9pTYqUMHmsy7HNx7f7/Tx0F4vi
RGS0TurIuEuRYjqvsfxxVICiMx6BVUu547zS/EhfLnyB2EqJ7RIRrYRvdOhDx5Fk/Trw
XmxfhQtVZiRfM3+EGENhMV82stW6kq5PRp2rJuxDWgDEtRMQ2O7vYEntvUSQxd4bzQtV
3yZ+KUKodS+OWX9nj1jgrXyowYfCoYDydiE51E4q7MgxeokbrHrIkzVsIV8t6aa/IyRA
gs5g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQ022G1sr1mp20RI0yqkSsYurj/11rG9AyPpYVi22n5sMHsE+uqLHmdczul+9NCkw==
X-Received: by 10.66.101.74 with SMTP id fe10mr9290131pab.66.1454028776470;
Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:52:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.109] (cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com.
[76.167.237.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
xz6sm18975332pab.42.2016.01.28.16.52.54
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
(version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128);
Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:52:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.1
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_67A54A39-3546-4C46-8152-C397BB40F45D";
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:52:53 -0800
Message-Id: <42F57F58-7C67-43DD-81DE-2C77E03733F2@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
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: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Classification Process
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: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:52:57 -0000
--Apple-Mail=_67A54A39-3546-4C46-8152-C397BB40F45D
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_53742A85-78F0-4090-8847-E4A5820701E2"
--Apple-Mail=_53742A85-78F0-4090-8847-E4A5820701E2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
Folks,
I think the current situation with forks could have been avoided with a =
better process that can distinguish between different layers for bitcoin =
modification proposals.
For instance, BIP64 was proposed by Mike Hearn, which does not affect =
the consensus layer at all. Many Core devs disliked the proposal and =
Mike had lots of pushback. Regardless of whether or not you agree with =
the merits of Mike=E2=80=99s ideas here, fact is having nodes that =
support BIP64 would not fundamentally break the Bitcoin network.
This issue prompted Mike to break off from Core and create XT as the =
applications he was developing required BIP64 to work. With this split, =
Gavin found a new home for his big block ideas=E2=80=A6and the two =
teamed up.
We need to have a process that clearly distinguishes these different =
layers and allows much more freedom in the upper layers while requiring =
agreement at the consensus layer. Many of these fork proposals are =
actually conflating different features, only some of which would =
actually be consensus layer changes. When people proposing nonconsensus =
features get pushback from Core developers they feel rejected and are =
likely to team up with others trying to push for hard forks and the =
like.
A while back I had submitted a BIP - BIP123 - that addresses this =
issue. I have updated it to include all the currently proposed and =
accepted BIPs and have submitted a PR: =
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/311 =
<https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/311>
I urge everyone to seriously consider getting this BIP accepted as a top =
priority before we get more projects all trying their hand at stuff and =
not understanding these critical distinctions.
- Eric
--Apple-Mail=_53742A85-78F0-4090-8847-E4A5820701E2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" =
class=3D"">Folks,<div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">I =
think the current situation with forks could have been avoided with a =
better process that can distinguish between different layers for bitcoin =
modification proposals.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D"">For instance, BIP64 was proposed by Mike Hearn, which does =
not affect the consensus layer at all. Many Core devs disliked the =
proposal and Mike had lots of pushback. Regardless of whether or not you =
agree with the merits of Mike=E2=80=99s ideas here, fact is having nodes =
that support BIP64 would not fundamentally break the Bitcoin =
network.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">This =
issue prompted Mike to break off from Core and create XT as the =
applications he was developing required BIP64 to work. With this split, =
Gavin found a new home for his big block ideas=E2=80=A6and the two =
teamed up.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">We =
need to have a process that clearly distinguishes these different layers =
and allows much more freedom in the upper layers while requiring =
agreement at the consensus layer. Many of these fork proposals are =
actually conflating different features, only some of which would =
actually be consensus layer changes. When people proposing nonconsensus =
features get pushback from Core developers they feel rejected and are =
likely to team up with others trying to push for hard forks and the =
like.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">A while =
back I had submitted a BIP - BIP123 - that addresses this issue. I =
have updated it to include all the currently proposed and accepted BIPs =
and have submitted a PR: <a =
href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/311" =
class=3D"">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/311</a></div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">I urge everyone to =
seriously consider getting this BIP accepted as a top priority before we =
get more projects all trying their hand at stuff and not understanding =
these critical distinctions.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">- =
Eric</div></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_53742A85-78F0-4090-8847-E4A5820701E2--
--Apple-Mail=_67A54A39-3546-4C46-8152-C397BB40F45D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWqrflAAoJEJNAI64YFENUnDwQALq2i7+SGS0QcapK3JizxecT
1WXMeu4AeW78C51tpmH5YCEKEvXsEQz+o+X/DCcIHxY3cTXxc0RMdb7toFC3f/0V
WnP16dQBsav9zXkAj1vK6FpehCB7RUBK0HDxBCGJfunSPisQHnHnxRc96hPmpu78
aNkIxM5K+vkEJMq0+6KFFQQmFU6n7yXhiRso8ZW1wVhrWhAH5SvLMOcVN9PUoxgW
EEp12eoYUBkPyHzMfoWBJ75huHcWXeoUptfmw3fsEEY1CrvBHUhVKQKnkXebsnSQ
2BOBF477a2wl5sMqdjfpOhGx5DBIeU3o32lE/iU6wqH0YKnjSKabvf2dJiASv9qF
QG4IJqroSPNGYfTdcDq3VQGKhkrMbegUjxqYJKh50BUcjPS+QhEXK9qe52CHM2Ft
9QgHWdATRDYIheTiLK9MgUOTGRYonVfaTm5986JYeYobSISpLtoRAwMSAwYDkUwh
vOeRMXe76L5PaRfrVjpCiRMIdvY6MBY+gzfOsJKijyQjHjPe2fvgz5sQzDawdvCf
iqseUKyCx6JWcZX7ED+C5TotPuSdvBEMg/4+2AvRseJz8/u4d6/EERhKKGKKNCSv
GJeGM5yLru7cqk1Rbw0fUb67NBwHCWpYmTxOTJpNuvQ5EVdCuKPbcFihG0uNxeGl
DlG54BmHG87LujTL8XtG
=06zP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_67A54A39-3546-4C46-8152-C397BB40F45D--
|
