rich1.0npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2https://nostr.ae/npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-05-07 📝 Original message:On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 04:05:41PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote: > > One thing is the Bitcoin core project where you could argue that the 5 > > committers decide (I don't know why Wladimir would have any more > > authority than the others). > > > > Because he is formally the maintainer. I quite liked Wladimir's description of what someone with the ability to merge pull requests into Bitcoin Core is: @orionwl github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin repository admin, or maybe just "janitor" -https://twitter.com/orionwl/status/563688293737697281 In any case, we can't force people to run Bitcoin Core - an unpopular patch that fails to reach consensus is a strong sign that it may not get user acceptance either - so we might as well accept that centralized authority over the development process isn't going to fly and deal with the sometimes messy consequences. Like I said, you're welcome to fork the project and try to get user acceptance for the fork. -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000013e67b343b1f6d75cc87dfb54430bdb3bcf66d8d4b3ef6b8 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 650 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150507/cd705b97/attachment.sig>