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
|
Return-Path: <jgarzik@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71609305
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:49:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com (mail-wi0-f182.google.com
[209.85.212.182])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F5CB108
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:49:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicnd19 with SMTP id nd19so148954655wic.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:49:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=gLSz7f3rHECPK0J14p6bJYZJ6LtoWyGAFb30Mfgx2IA=;
b=pLnHJ7Pm57gW6qMU1roCCFYo2TMZ9jr2+UNn3A3Z/hE1fRqCiBtEstQP0Az36Ci/er
NkmoULOiO5cbtOufrqMVrZOji4QVYrEZ1RLh9Shkfa6EaP+6Qz9VdacxV/NDOKiTDDq/
UozDtGUgYXAI0gLX6AGazD39XGRH/HSDiQTWV6ifMdxd0oWh1F2PU9emsShLRphGF4Ea
mUT2VeH7NGQOEYEe7ICQwjuRLYZm3Vp2t4NgKsxOwUfnLpgzoSAjHPmVScNYu3yHp4Ik
m9zi7iu1VCr38hoKBduatNbx4cFF6PMGX76Lq77L02qm2NCrvh+N8EkhR+Kzl0q0a3PH
JYxg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.176.201 with SMTP id ck9mr63777148wjc.108.1435189766578;
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:49:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.176.2 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.176.2 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <COL402-EAS109000AAC490BCF2DD69116CDAF0@phx.gbl>
References: <COL402-EAS109000AAC490BCF2DD69116CDAF0@phx.gbl>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:49:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CADm_WcYZ-O3fhm5bNCBF_mkAES+vVxsOGFtpovqgt9v9sY4TZA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@gmail.com>
To: Raystonn <raystonn@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d1eb438e69c05194c286c
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
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Process and Votes
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: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:49:29 -0000
--089e013d1eb438e69c05194c286c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
BIPs are accepted into BIP repo with a low "reasonable" threshold.
Code is accepted into the Bitcoin Core repo when it is likely that the
community will accept a change.
There is no voting in the way you think. Devs commit changes the users will
accept and use. Users "fire" developers by choosing different devs or
different software.
Standard open source method.
On Jun 24, 2015 4:41 PM, "Raystonn" <raystonn@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to start a civil discussion on an undefined, or at least
> unwritten, portion of the BIP process. Who should get to vote on approval
> to commit a BIP implementation into Bitcoin Core? Is a simple majority of
> these voters sufficient for approval? If not, then what is?
>
> Raystonn
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--089e013d1eb438e69c05194c286c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr">BIPs=C2=A0 are accepted into BIP repo with a low "reaso=
nable" threshold.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">Code is accepted into the Bitcoin Core repo when it is likel=
y that the community will accept a change.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">There is no voting in the way you think. Devs commit changes=
the users will accept and use. Users "fire" developers by choosi=
ng different devs or different software.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">Standard open source method.<br>
</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Jun 24, 2015 4:41 PM, "Raystonn" &l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:raystonn@hotmail.com">raystonn@hotmail.com</a>> wrot=
e:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I would like to s=
tart a civil discussion on an undefined, or at least unwritten, portion of =
the BIP process.=C2=A0 Who should get to vote on approval to commit a BIP i=
mplementation into Bitcoin Core?=C2=A0 Is a simple majority of these voters=
sufficient for approval?=C2=A0 If not, then what is?<br>
<br>
Raystonn<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
--089e013d1eb438e69c05194c286c--
|