rich1.0npub1azvhdrf9fu6n0tm7yez4j6zcxcedp2ct6nrcq3z74naqs7kgpk8s5t2krqhttps://nostr.ae/npub1azvhdrf9fu6n0tm7yez4j6zcxcedp2ct6nrcq3z74naqs7kgpk8s5t2krqnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-09-28 📝 Original message:My initial reaction is just HUH?!?!? Is this some sophisticated form of humor I'm just not getting? On September 28, 2015 3:48:57 AM PDT, 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 -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150928/0eabc6d7/attachment.html>