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
|
Return-Path: <marcel@jamin.net>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4C941C4B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:34:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-yk0-f179.google.com (mail-yk0-f179.google.com
[209.85.160.179])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F86C8F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:34:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ykdg206 with SMTP id g206so73096145ykd.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=Ko8yGVBJuYLd/lw0knMEmsvP3fEZdmkiimyiwd4jGpI=;
b=g7RM8aFIO3+I5Ya/bFVGuD9RUSOaXNeYoNw7B6A5AHWPJfM1gATPbdWr2inh6lsT8x
jZA4oTIIAtagUmFdYbeWrGof1oz5KgBxEdU8xF+KiaejTY5WM2r60B1v53X44RU4sh/l
DOKWblyN86XAWDuUviF1ksxCnnzZmDIcOiaqj+VMJE5QjhOMgvLZy2NGc+Ztvz2HjRIb
MX5p0qS7p0W6SxmgLJPGDScmHwqnHB0yJht6l/Vj2ocgyrpttCSMnERj8DVMgj8aAiL4
33UUR3zR6v0UvgznlzT9uLeAUsOUgg0BQAwJAwfAfRhcnyVgRPD/qC66aenzfjPeNCEp
zj7Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk8AlZaj4SfoCpQNUTAp2JK3BlcZMe/8UWo/1KsQG3/ztyO07QW4J9j7qnA1s192lRRVsKk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.170.173.1 with SMTP id p1mr7100859ykd.101.1443695678626;
Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.13.220.65 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20151001101544.GA10901@amethyst.visucore.com>
References: <20150924112555.GA21355@amethyst.visucore.com>
<201509301757.44035.luke@dashjr.org>
<20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com>
<CAAUq486=TisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV_KKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n_ajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=w=rLhmOkJhfQg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAUq484+g89yD+s7iR_mGWPM3TTN7V6-EPb1ig=P1BKfcbztPg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg@mail.gmail.com>
<20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com>
<CAAUq486EXSJ1ri-3nWMt9vWhoajLp+LkWTV_-ZvU_FE+qfqcpA@mail.gmail.com>
<20151001101544.GA10901@amethyst.visucore.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:34:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAUq487e96agsBmHSThfLQyU+sMSiCwxPEdtZU1_xbsqVWyvrw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
To: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ac04416d0cf05210898ae
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 development mailing list <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
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 10:34:39 -0000
--001a113ac04416d0cf05210898ae
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
2015-10-01 12:15 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:10:45PM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:
> > I think the question has already been answered for you by the companies
> > that build on top of it, the investments being made and the $3.5 billion
> > market cap. The 1.0.0 tag is probably long overdue.
>
> May I remind you that by far, most of that investment is not in the
> Bitcoin Core software.
>
As I understand it, right now the bitcoin protocol is defined by the
bitcoin core implementation. Or is there anything else to point to? So I'd
say my point still stands.
Other implementations copy what bitcoin core does.
> > Then you could start using the version as a signaling mechanism.
>
> We certainly could, it is a decision to not to.
>
Simply because of the "1.0.0" issue or for other reasons as well?
> 2015-10-01 11:56 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > 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 "why is the Bitcoin Core software still
> > > <1.0.0". 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.
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
>
--001a113ac04416d0cf05210898ae
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>2015-10-01 12:15 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan <=
span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:laanwj@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">=
laanwj@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px =
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);bord=
er-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:10:45PM +0=
200, Marcel Jamin wrote:<br>
> I think the question has already been answered for you by the companie=
s<br>
> that build on top of it, the investments being made and the $3.5 billi=
on<br>
> market cap. The 1.0.0 tag is probably long overdue.<br>
<br>
May I remind you that by far, most of that investment is not in the Bitcoin=
Core software.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><span style=3D"font-siz=
e:12.8px">As I understand it, right now the bitcoin protocol is defined by =
the bitcoin core implementation. Or is there anything else to point to?</sp=
an>=C2=A0So I'd say my point still stands.</div><div><br></div><div>Oth=
er implementations copy what bitcoin core does.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-=
width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;paddin=
g-left:1ex">
> Then you could start using the version as a signaling mechanism.<br>
<br>
We certainly could, it is a decision to not to.<br></blockquote><div><br></=
div><div>Simply because of the "1.0.0" issue or for other reasons=
as well?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;=
border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex=
">> 2015-10-01 11:56 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan <<a href=3D"m=
ailto:laanwj@gmail.com">laanwj@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
><br>
> > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:<br>
> > > I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1=
.0.0<br>
> ><br>
> > I'll interpret the question as "why is the Bitcoin Core =
software still<br>
> > <1.0.0". Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version,=
the block/transaction<br>
> > versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest network proto=
col<br>
> > version is 70011.<br>
> ><br>
> > Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechan=
ism. They<br>
> > just count up, every half year.<br>
> ><br>
> > Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the =
software mature<br>
> > enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long argument=
s, all of<br>
> > which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially incr=
easing a<br>
> > number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.<br>
> ><br>
> > Wladimir<br>
> ><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>
--001a113ac04416d0cf05210898ae--
|
