rich1.0npub15wz8j5cse6sexlw6f5q7arc5efe5hxn6kcxxyy222et8qms4u3lsemaru8https://nostr.ae/npub15wz8j5cse6sexlw6f5q7arc5efe5hxn6kcxxyy222et8qms4u3lsemaru8njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-09-28 📝 Original message:Why are they called soft forks when they are really hidden forks? Isn't the point of a soft fork to prevent old clients from rejecting what they don't have the code to validate? That seems dangerous. notplato On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 2:12 PM, odinn via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > And still no movement on BIP 63... > > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1083961.20 > > Apart from that, > > All my prior objections to XT still hold as expressed on this list. > XT is not acceptable. > > On the topic of consensus: > > Reaching consensus, I hope, is something that developers can > accomplish by refining and adjusting the BIPS and coming to agreement > upon them. This should be something that can be done in a few months > time, before the end of the year. > > Cheers, > > - - O > > Adam Back via bitcoin-dev: > > I wonder what Gavin's views are, he's usually constructive, and see > > if he'll include it in XT - I think he may have said he was > > supportive. > > > > The rationale for soft vs hard-forks is well known, so I wont go > > over them. > > > > Adam > > > > > > On 28 September 2015 at 06:48, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev > > <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> There is no consensus on using a soft fork to deploy this > >> feature. It will result in the same problems as all the other > >> soft forks - SPV wallets will become less reliable during the > >> rollout period. I am against that, as it's entirely avoidable. > >> > >> Make it a hard fork and my objection will be dropped. > >> > >> Until then, as there is no consensus, you need to do one of two > >> things: > >> > >> 1) Drop the "everyone must agree to make changes" idea that > >> people here like to peddle, and do it loudly, so everyone in the > >> community is correctly informed > >> > >> 2) Do nothing > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev > >> mailing list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > >> > > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing > > list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > > > - -- > http://abis.io ~ > "a protocol concept to enable decentralization > and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good" > https://keybase.io/odinn > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWCa0jAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CuCUIALiRt6cE3b+9f+l9m6aMTjIR > vTEIM/7B4dIZW9eatXmkxyd44uz5YoN93SlZtV62c90HCqqpFRBCfyXRyXzQ11E7 > 0i70or5LnWDOqrD1bSsCEdrQxPIpAQnv101UHe3iyn/uHAVBiz/HfqvGMruNt0r1 > 4sMecp+LedWpy6/p9c6iMHV1rhtYRfmRfJHj+9KlSn+in5PQKx2kieWqpfqjmlNs > J/UNoLvRuF0YxDcqEdp2BAaI0s+NyXBo3YDi4R77U9YPRj/cYuWHh/yPKAvFW+2K > 0d9NNuKSKEY/m4uW3ghPEJL7OxlGbOoNWFS3kcKYr+BanfsPTov7yHQhBuRBRPw= > =hd0W > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > 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/20150928/fd9d5a38/attachment.html>