From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:33:48 -0700 Received: from mail-qt1-f187.google.com ([209.85.160.187]) by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uP5fH-0000Uf-J5 for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:33:48 -0700 Received: by mail-qt1-f187.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4a442d07c5fsf124817221cf.3 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:33:47 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1749587622; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; b=Oe81P/bgeEHrvZd3b2P/a1VyhB1vJ+zYUeT3eNeRYqPhErbQgF3bn2I4cryX+4NTAG P3s9FCfa3fCJvp3HRBfdEbPQuhIzj8aLa1JnVurfXNOZWYsQuQKU1trQr+RpwMPby3QU 19KU7wfqnhJsz+awsiM58iEr2IAe1ubW2M8tzaKo1A5EcGNTaVGS2CdkyrHk8Cj9jNOF LzWBGAehOB6KJzgZ2RVEpcp/NLxoYwd4q1DNqs4nIIX7LBcDPskHXFIrgFMx8m6GvEYs BYF+buEQ/Jj/e/RTo74qexQpPkLIwJ0QtnVLC78/L1XwunQ9grpiRRARQaQd3h3LMLoz y3MA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:from:content-language:references:cc:to:subject :mime-version:date:message-id:sender:dkim-signature; bh=E42id6KdqYLyJh5ozyQcegj6rAfF8xrruJ9UUkbfUF4=; fh=2rv82FJtYqbMFTI37/64fSLY9h/ba957RoLYLQRv1ZQ=; b=Y8r4JypWUF3vXSHpa5AKa+u4l8OyKRrWcZxUeBk+DTLlnMYJpFUGVS7hh0+MOXSogP Sh+dYxfJ2nVdzXNg0nbdvRAnkYnv5c5/Q2SSA0uV6FK9dhBbm1AGRAyvy80NRDphSUeu t9PhsMl6BEQoRQh1as3rRrzyhXn5jeVPszZ53JBhIRAUgMlsy8BRLz5S7dAu3PszSom2 Cay3j4Ik8fCeDVv4r2KplcMfq4epTcb0R8y4itfIuIWsOSuMAypfdufHUXRNpwdLVVJV tyMxKNVCkSuNUv+c/w0ia2pehqi6SL15Ovu0EFU9/jLRiWHwSdhImJnxPP7g0xIliiSp os6Q==; darn=gnusha.org ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@mattcorallo.com header.s=1749573662 header.b="dj/tRZA6"; dkim=pass header.i=@clients.mail.as397444.net header.s=1749573665 header.b=gUw13HCY; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lf-lists@mattcorallo.com designates 69.59.18.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=lf-lists@mattcorallo.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=mattcorallo.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1749587622; x=1750192422; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:mime-version:date :message-id:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=E42id6KdqYLyJh5ozyQcegj6rAfF8xrruJ9UUkbfUF4=; b=nk6k+OM0LrtO1GkxZxAvdW2Mk2zH4HkbuCFgTacpr+nb6GROicPx+8snzD1BbLdAIO ngiyEIHgIEWNDghIU5bnaNYLFx5XiBU7PLQq9bPTzV2GFayPYJ2iTLu37LsBmNbtNKaU 7JtsbEIC3EIDYcklFb7cxSR54slRloUSmUq4JbMAQK577goICrXejj/QYo6vYD855Dqb JGTFmG6Nqh2ES24J+9NCazJxvHG3fSnI7hQeHW9/DBjMQxtaUVWRzwLBMTKf7SgqcAjP /yTXoq7IJq5FP09h5YOk2nHCVx62MSkaTftofblafzgS2Jcghj8X71KMcS/ur91asoqz 3w3w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749587622; x=1750192422; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:mime-version:date :message-id:x-beenthere:x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=E42id6KdqYLyJh5ozyQcegj6rAfF8xrruJ9UUkbfUF4=; b=qN+4pDiwE1BIaiCDZbPRYRDVPCXM89CEn/3q0tr4VhTahv6TXRHZDtcVHDbHHPUHXr Xn/0W8toXyBqGh/+P2vzqezHoSttupJWrKysxkxfTmq3q5LeKq/MPFuXzqGHDfVbVX93 Kf7PvoE98Yc3nYSePw56fbhoOWrZl3Ob8465lBp61xK7x0LlINCZpJMISp/d/oUtTFrq XAVacb/KTeJ7X11ZpSiloIwMQ/UD37+IPbYQG9pbvQuHK90HHAEn/sBGdVpqHXbxhgg4 6VW9XEof79Vm34rn9tyPYQCK1TVE/zjXjLAf9yvXradT5/QZ3mXqTjBWFN6kXXXWnaga g5XA== Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCVgB4rQseqE29sHnVE7zstmn0J1DToiPIJW+GRFqWKSpijZ55JpUsvia8QmYJaLktdtmVyc14wZfhtC@gnusha.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx//bfZW0G2B9GI4wJOpKErH5gC1bgUX5lAisj7f4K6MyFDtGDK j6r5O//G2F/6EMjNRr0CWbQ2trsVYj679XORTOoaJ4RxQFOKv2H5nBPW X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGfopqFTzCSTw9kjZT4RxxdpFrlvcj6aDATx3zR55xDsk4yzlK6jEO1SEFU+c/ZDjoefG5A9g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:4816:b0:4a4:31c5:fc8e with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4a714c4354dmr4395051cf.48.1749587621735; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:33:41 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; h=AZMbMZfC/r+jN6LE2dmdf5d0dETd1R/9EBYXp3ie0cfqLHe6GA== Received: by 2002:a05:622a:14f:b0:476:9c9c:1a5d with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4a5aee8855cls106437561cf.2.-pod-prod-05-us; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:33:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCVar2g0so+v/ff4ll3/I1JBkoe9nkru6grxmDYscn8XN/bKcp/BKRXj7/awO7Jb8AO1hb3UkRaoOGFK@googlegroups.com X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4385:b0:7d3:90f2:c19f with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7d3a95d75d0mr56049085a.31.1749587618791; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:33:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 2002:a05:620a:aa03:b0:7b6:d2da:e6ae with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7d3a8db8959ms85a; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:17:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCWvlVtWtf9FrP9Zpck2YgXQ+jyEkv5ZYExq689IGP/GpkZtWGNmBmCWooE46HdRCqjNzX5LppsEFGCL@googlegroups.com X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:468c:b0:7cd:5003:d91f with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7d3a882bad5mr30662285a.20.1749575835374; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:17:15 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1749575835; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; b=Hx+Oo0qDsEAukCXO/7TPZPpPDIRAbn6cxs7PB2bmOcdYv29eDImgHPI+i05/K3FwWc jX4N+o5W/GHD16+Am8wYZ4Fpw3bE58wpjU+F8o+eZ41e7TbCFYdzEx3/1cbm75YKc+Yx XZg9qNUG6gtZcjfdUboKjuBLFBEwZ1rRBWi6xak0yYM/FuerVVmbyOM+p30fBh7pcH7H A/hsF1NlIWA9hYVPmbQsAK/z0CTij3MD0JKgANbISm7iWiAd/j7Bn4dySbbgQqK/HxL8 igD+FP0wYDVv96DX+8fNngcWCD9EQojFnjQ0LA2Asn6ifGSeY5OFoTQ1gShjRd3aj8S0 7jhw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:mime-version:date:message-id :dkim-signature:dkim-signature; bh=dMHH/r0wyRAibDmNgZCQJro5nNKhG/zikrNKGhSF+1Q=; fh=zIg9H+dR7ulEWuuAI6Hp2G8xq5y9PEXRjfpoj4BGgPk=; b=Ji6GR3HAZD5Gpx1MqpMH+09qjilmbR5a5NF14puSyCZHoh+pkkbdcMnsIlGkRbE8LH T1ot/0uuoPyw+gRsEOpSQ4G3v175LnLmLPoCEmISs/0O1fvZwWVdtrIx3WKUbnSKXKWT 3OJKVTwlbQJTxduq6fuAJ3c8sTHBeTh9xeRDc12ZD9/eg7DBF10pEhJP1xIR5YVHE+e0 C+QA+OSRW5ZYGKTYbd0ofoqbwU0NbAErX3vxataDSVevC4/P8VSQt1Qqx8uYUI+AOX0x rmmaGAtsY+kXFBWT0ItyZno6N+TatnA/EZUZk1p1l03kj5UbF2wpE2AzpG2uoMqJffjZ c8nw==; dara=google.com ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@mattcorallo.com header.s=1749573662 header.b="dj/tRZA6"; dkim=pass header.i=@clients.mail.as397444.net header.s=1749573665 header.b=gUw13HCY; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lf-lists@mattcorallo.com designates 69.59.18.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=lf-lists@mattcorallo.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=mattcorallo.com Received: from mail.as397444.net (mail.as397444.net. [69.59.18.99]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id af79cd13be357-7d24b31ffc4si48022685a.0.2025.06.10.10.17.14 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:17:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lf-lists@mattcorallo.com designates 69.59.18.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=69.59.18.99; X-DKIM-Note: Keys used to sign are likely public at X-DKIM-Note: https://as397444.net/dkim/mattcorallo.com and X-DKIM-Note: https://as397444.net/dkim/clients.mail.as397444.net X-DKIM-Note: For more info, see https://as397444.net/dkim/ Received: by mail.as397444.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) (Exim) (envelope-from ) id 1uP2ay-0007TB-31; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 17:17:09 +0000 Message-ID: <1147a254-5033-4663-99f0-7e98a5b6b6c0@mattcorallo.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:17:07 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] CTV + CSFS: a letter To: Andrew Poelstra , "David A. Harding" Cc: James O'Beirne , Bitcoin Development Mailing List References: <195051b7c393b9a28727e87647ac002b@dtrt.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Matt Corallo In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Original-Sender: lf-lists@mattcorallo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@mattcorallo.com header.s=1749573662 header.b="dj/tRZA6"; dkim=pass header.i=@clients.mail.as397444.net header.s=1749573665 header.b=gUw13HCY; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lf-lists@mattcorallo.com designates 69.59.18.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=lf-lists@mattcorallo.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=mattcorallo.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 786775582512 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) On 6/10/25 9:23 AM, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > Le Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 04:08:21PM -1000, David A. Harding a =C3=A9crit : >> >> Why do you think nobody in Core wants to engage at all with consensus >> changes (or, at least, specifically the proposals for CTV & CSFS)? >> >=20 > Because everybody actively working on Core has a project that, while > interesting and useful, does not affect users or the network in any > visible way. Over the years there has been a ton of work refactoring > the project into multiple libraries, rewriting the logic behind the > RPC interface and help text, upgrading to new C++ versions, etc., > and yet if you want to mine from your local node on a local miner > today you need to run Sjors' personal fork of the project plus two > other daemons. >=20 > I'm being a bit unfair here -- over the same period there has been a > ton of critical infrastructure work on transaction relay, descriptor > wallets and mempool unification. Some things, like TRUC, even change > relay behavior on the network. But these are still things that no > ordinary user could articulate well enough to complain about. >=20 > This is understandable -- I also don't want to deal with the kind of > BS where making simple obvious mempool optimizations leads to Twitter > brigading and funded FUD campaigns. (Let alone something like the segwit > FUD campaign which was much larger and more professional.) And of > course, consensus changes requires large-scale public engagement; these > changes are not "luck of the draw" "hope your change doesn't get linked > on twitter" kinda things. >=20 > But the result, when everybody feels this way, is a lack of engagement > from the project as a whole. I don't think this is a fair characterization in the slightest. Yes, many p= eople who contribute to=20 Bitcoin Core are not currently spending their time working on consensus cha= nges, but that doesn't=20 mean they didn't pick to work on something that they think is the highest R= OI on their time for the=20 bitcoin network as a whole. The relay changes you mention but sweep under the rug are a critical improv= ement to the security=20 model and usability of lightning, a widely-deployed and now highly utilized= critical piece of=20 bitcoin (Cash App's public numbers from the Vegas conference indicate its a= bout 25% of their=20 withdraw volume by count!). While many of the letter signatories may think that that isn't the right us= e of time, or the best=20 way to improve Bitcoin, I don't think its a fair conclusion to claim that t= hey're somehow wrong,=20 rather than simply of a different opinion. Its also probably fair that many developers don't really *want* to work on = consensus changes because=20 of the risk of Drama, but that's clearly not universal, given Antoine's wor= k to pick up and tweak=20 the Great Consensus Cleanup. Clearly some Bitcoin Core contributors think t= hat working on consensus=20 changes is the best use of their time, just not the ones that the letter si= gnatories happen to think=20 are the important ones. Of course sign-on letters do little to reduce the impact of Drama, only con= tribute to it :( > Complicating matters is the fact that it's quite hard to contribute > things to Bitcoin Core -- it is hard to get reviews, when you can get > them they're slow, you need to spend months or years rebasing over the > codebase churn, etc. These problems are well-known. So it's hard to > onboard new people who want to push on more-visible things. >=20 >> The usual purpose of an open letter is to generate public pressure again= st >> the target (otherwise, if you didn't want to generate public pressure, y= ou >> would send a private letter). >=20 > There isn't really any place to send a "private" letter. For most > open-source projects I could just file a discussion on their Github > repo, which would be unnoticed and unread by anyone else. Core does not > have that privilege. >=20 > There are in-person meetups a few times a year but for (happy) family > reasons I've been unable to attend, and won't be able to for the next > few years at least. >=20 > And of course I could email specific developers personally, but there > are no individuals that it makes sense to target, because this isn't an > individual problem. It's an incentive problem. If its an incentive problem, though, sending a vaguely-threatening letter g= iving a six-month=20 ultimatum is all the more likely to drive the incentives in the wrong direc= tion, not the right one.=20 Asking individuals why they, personally, are not currently working towards = script expansion changes=20 is probably much more illuminating, or asking "what would it take to convin= ce you to work on these=20 kinds of changes". In my experience, there is interest from various Bitcoin Core contributors = to spend time on this,=20 but four-year projects like mempool policy have some way to go towards thei= r conclusion and people=20 like to see things through :). The fact that several companies are working to build and deploy Ark-based p= ayment systems is also a=20 large part of that - having a concrete application where the developers see= substantial gains (which=20 can be independently evaluated, at least once things are up and running, wh= ich as I understand it=20 will be soon) with specific consensus changes is a strong motivator. Previo= us attempts at getting=20 CTV activated largely (in my experience) failed to get people excited becau= se the demonstrated=20 use-cases for CTV by itself did not feel super compelling. >> Does that mean that you feel the lack of >> engagement is a result of a previous lack of pressure? I have to admit = that >> runs counter to my own sense---I thought there was already significant >> social pressure on Bitcoin Core contributors to work on CTV (and now CSF= S); >> I wouldn't expect more pressure to achieve new results; rather, I'd expe= ct >> more pressure to create more frustration on all sides. >> >=20 > I think that logistically there isn't any non-public medium that would > work. Maybe solving this would also solve the incentive problems around > making big changes! Conferences, individual emails, signal messages are all options that exist?= I'm kinda confused by=20 this comment, honestly. Yea, there's no great way to "address all of Bitcoi= n Core" at once, but that=20 doesn't mean most of the most prolific contributors don't go to regular con= ferences, meetups, and=20 aren't responsive to personal messages (at least in some cases). I imagine, maybe wrongly, but I imagine that nearly every substantial Bitco= in Core contributor is at=20 least two conferences a year, and they're usually speakers so their names a= re on the websites of the=20 conferences. > I spent a while deliberating about whether signing onto an open letter > would just cause flamewars and "more pressure" -- especially since I'm > probably closer to Core development than any of the other signers, and > because its specific technical demand (CTV + CSFS) is not even something > I feel strongly about. >=20 > My goal was to start exactly this discussion, by talking about the role > Core plays in this ecosystem and pointing to (in my view) the incentive > problems that are getting in the way of that role. >=20 >> Alternatively, if you feel like the lack of engagement is a result of so= me >> other condition, I would be curious to learn of that condition and learn= why >> you thought an open letter (with what comes across as an ultimatum) woul= d >> help address it. >> >=20 > I apologize if it comes off as an ultimatum -- it has a timeline, but > one for a "respectful ask" for "review and integration" and no specified > consquences (I'm not even sure what consequences would look like ... > perhaps a fork of Core? I can say that I personally would never go along > with a consensus-changing fork of Core, barring some extreme event like > outright abandonment of the project.) Fair enough. There are apparently differing views by other letter-signers o= n the meaning of the "six=20 month" timeline :). Matt --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/= 1147a254-5033-4663-99f0-7e98a5b6b6c0%40mattcorallo.com.