rich1.0npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8https://nostr.ae/npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2017-03-29 📝 Original message:While Segwit's change from 1 mb size limit to 4 mb weight limit seems to be controversial among some users (I find that very often it is because they have been confused about what segwit does or even outright lied about it) I don't think it's very interesting to discuss further size increases. I find more interesting to talk to the users and see how they think Segwit harms them, maybe we missed something in segwit that needs to be removed for segwit to become uncontroversial, or maybe it is just disinformation. On the other hand, we may want to have our first uncontroversial hardfork asap, independently of block size. For example, we could do something as simple as fixing the timewarp attack as bip99 proposes. I cannot think of a hf that is easier to implement or has less potential for controversy than that. On 29 Mar 2017 8:32 am, "Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Wang Chun via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > The basic idea is, as many of us agree, hard fork is risky and should > be well prepared. We need a long time to deploy it. > Much as it may be appealing to repeal the block size limit now with a grace period until a replacement is needed in a repeal and replace strategy, it's dubious to assume that an idea can be agreed upon later when it can't be agreed upon now. Trying to put a time limit on it runs into the possibility that you'll find that whatever reasons there were for not having general agreement on a new setup before still apply, and running into the embarrassing situation of winding up sticking with the status quo after much sturm and drang. _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev at 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/20170329/6b3c913e/attachment.html>