From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 756731E67 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:25:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qg0-f44.google.com (mail-qg0-f44.google.com [209.85.192.44]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD87C87 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:25:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qgev79 with SMTP id v79so59504387qge.0 for ; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:subject :content-type; bh=IYkFiecQdWI2EQalVHaMG7Ulgeh/DxhDz314oq6DcNI=; b=nQTFjZvFYB1Aw9EnleOFhSEr7fRrcQ80YvR3ZeRKroONVAUtg1AqTr1dsLGifJse6G kYxPNErJfHPHr9oo+duNQKBaPr4im2/W078oC7EhnwGIq+VivSAol0qgbXtVdtlM6+an e900VGqWusTfkeQK1w9cRFMoMwCd74rLqwZ/CiDF9EDxM73oDDxJWbILURJ0GjQI5GSm 6UcN5yIxyO95TKKYZ1kSZBd86n3BFGBRkaU6DA4qEyQ3BgRPoK/np+eH96JMQeP0V0bs Yl0uoD1PWTTlKRuNVtf3ClRuWduEo9dxbUAYTe5DyDaFkFJYZD0QMiT1AN0UptpBsG97 2oNg== X-Received: by 10.140.85.135 with SMTP id n7mr10633575qgd.53.1443695156895; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hedwig-18.prd.orcali.com (ec2-54-85-253-144.compute-1.amazonaws.com. [54.85.253.144]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b91sm2124086qge.8.2015.10.01.03.25.56 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:25:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:25:56 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Nodemailer (0.5.0; +http://www.nodemailer.com/) Message-Id: <1443695156118.ad4bc1ee@Nodemailer> In-Reply-To: References: X-Orchestra-Oid: 9DF71B7C-840E-4FB5-B5BD-05CD7B74CCA3 X-Orchestra-Sig: 164c79f85cef3ae0bbecd4149bdba41bed6c1651 X-Orchestra-Thrid: TD56C876D-E76D-40BE-ACDA-81C322724964_1513822300518443099 X-Orchestra-Thrid-Sig: 8e42e6e9aecb21b76c0a4c25b5eca7ceb38d80d0 X-Orchestra-Account: 6a0e7c82210c410d0fed500a1873b2ff66cab8ef From: digitsu@gmail.com To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:25:59 -0000 ------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0 ;-) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Marcel Jamin Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule To: Btc Drak I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0 I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production. =E2=80=94 Regards, On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM, null wrote: > Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org > You can reach the person managing the list at > bitcoin-dev-owner@lists.linuxfoundation.org > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than =22Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest...=22 > Today's Topics: > 1. Re: Design Competition (odinn) > 2. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > (Wladimir J. van der Laan) > 3. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin) > 4. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Btc Drak) > 5. Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin) > 6. Re: Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > (Wladimir J. van der Laan) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:38:50 +0000 > From: odinn > To: Richard Olsen , bitcoin-dev > > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition > Message-ID: <560CB8DA.6060801@riseup.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dwindows-1252 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > Grosses me out that you have enforced KYC as part of what you are > doing for anyone who would decide to get involved: > https://wiki.lykkex.com/=3Fid=3Dstart#lykke=5Fcitizens > Good luck with that, I'm sure not going to be a part of it, and I > recommend that no-one else does either. > - - O > Richard Olsen via bitcoin-dev: >> All, >>=20 >> We are looking for participants in a Bitcoin related competition: >> the aim is to build a trading platform (initially for foreign >> exchange, other assets will follow) which lets participants settle >> their trades through the blockchain via coloured coins. To >> facilitate a quicker trade reconciliation, the use of a sidechain >> is a suggestion but by no means a requirement. There will be an >> online briefing event today where we will outline the requirements >> in more detail, though much of it we have posted on our website >> www.lykkex.com . >>=20 >> As we want this to be a community driven effort rather than >> something turning into a proprietary technology, all contributions >> will be made available under a MIT license on Github. >>=20 >> I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing >> event or over email, >>=20 >> Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F = bitcoin-dev mailing >> list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org=20 >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >>=20 > - --=20 > http://abis.io ~ > =22a protocol concept to enable decentralization > and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good=22 > https://keybase.io/odinn > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z > c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/ > Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP > ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG > ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt > KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=3D > =3D41DC > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > ------------------------------ > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200 > From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 > To: Luke Dashjr > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: <20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8 > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote: >> On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan = via=20 >> bitcoin-dev wrote: >> > 2015-12-01 >> > ----------- >> > - Feature freeze >>=20 >> Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until after= the HK=20 >> workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled it = from the=20 >> release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for = it=20 >> too)=3F > In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code changes will= no longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.=20 > I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK workshop = I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code = makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to decouple = consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases. > We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this change needs= to make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a = time-based instead of feature-based release schedule. > We can always do a 0.12.1. > Wladimir > ------------------------------ > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:59 +0200 > From: Marcel Jamin > To: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 > Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer = spec=3F > 2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>: >> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote: >> > On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan = via >> > bitcoin-dev wrote: >> > > 2015-12-01 >> > > ----------- >> > > - Feature freeze >> > >> > Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until = after the HK >> > workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled it = from >> the >> > release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for= it >> > too)=3F >> >> In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code changes = will no >> longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs. >> >> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK = workshop >> I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code >> makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to = decouple >> consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases. >> >> We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this change = needs to >> make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a = time-based >> instead of feature-based release schedule. >> >> We can always do a 0.12.1. >> >> Wladimir >> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > ------------------------------ > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:17:52 +0100 > From: Btc Drak > To: Marcel Jamin > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer = spec=3F >> > We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance = releases > are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > ------------------------------ > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200 > From: Marcel Jamin > To: Btc Drak > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > > Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22 > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Marcel Jamin > Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00 > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > To: Btc Drak > I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0 > I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production. > 2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak : >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev < >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer = spec=3F >>> >> >> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance = releases >> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example. >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > ------------------------------ > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:56:55 +0200 > From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 > To: Marcel Jamin > Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list > > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule > Message-ID: <20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8 > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote: >> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0 > I'll interpret the question as =22why is the Bitcoin Core software still = <1.0.0=22. Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the = block/transaction versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest = network protocol version is 70011.=20 > Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They = just count up, every half year. > Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature = enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all of = which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing a = number. We're horribly stressed-out as is. > Wladimir > ------------------------------ > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2 > ***************************************** ------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0
;-)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>


I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.= 0

I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.






=E2=80=94 Regards,


On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM,= bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org <bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.= org> wrote:

Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
bitcoin-dev-owner@lists.linuxfoundation.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more = specific
than =22Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest...=22


Today's Topics:

1. Re: Design Competition (odinn)
2. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
(Wladimir J. van der Laan)
3. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
4. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Btc Drak)
5. Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
6. Re: Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
(Wladimir J. van der Laan)


---------------------------------------------------------------= -------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:38:50 +0000
From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>
To: Richard Olsen <richard.olsen@lykkex.com>, bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition
Message-ID: <560CB8DA.6060801@riseup.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dwindows-1252

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Grosses me out that you have enforced KYC as part of what you are
doing for anyone who would decide to get involved:

https://wiki.lykkex.com/=3Fid=3Dstart#lykke=5Fcitizens

Good luck with that, I'm sure not going to be a part of it, and I
recommend that no-one else does either.

- - O

Richard Olsen via bitcoin-dev:
> All,
>=20
> We are looking for participants in a Bitcoin related competition:
> the aim is to build a trading platform (initially for foreign
> exchange, other assets will follow) which lets participants = settle
> their trades through the blockchain via coloured coins. To
> facilitate a quicker trade reconciliation, the use of a sidechain
> is a suggestion but by no means a requirement. There will be an
> online briefing event today where we will outline the = requirements
> in more detail, though much of it we have posted on our website
> www.lykkex.com .
>=20
> As we want this to be a community driven effort rather than
> something turning into a proprietary technology, all = contributions
> will be made available under a MIT license on Github.
>=20
> I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing
> event or over email,
>=20
> Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen
>=20
>=20
>=20
> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= bitcoin-dev mailing
> list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org=20
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>=20

- --=20
http://abis.io ~
=22a protocol concept to enable decentralization
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good=22
https://keybase.io/odinn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z
c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/
Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP
ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG
ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt
KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=3D
=3D41DC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200
From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
Message-ID: <20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der = Laan via=20
> bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > 2015-12-01
> > -----------
> > - Feature freeze
>=20
> Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off until= after the HK=20
> workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we de-coupled= it from the=20
> release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update= for it=20
> too)=3F

In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code = changes will no longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.=20

I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK = workshop I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before = code makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to = decouple consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.

We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this change= needs to make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a= time-based instead of feature-based release schedule.

We can always do a 0.12.1.

Wladimir


------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:59 +0200
From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
To: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
Message-ID:
<CAAUq486=3DTisNp0MbFjWYdCsyVX-qx5dV=5FKKZuNR7Jp63KNWeiQ@mail.gmail= .com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22

Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer = spec=3F

2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev= <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:

> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van = der Laan via
> > bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > > 2015-12-01
> > > -----------
> > > - Feature freeze
> >
> > Where is =22Consensus freeze=22=3F Shouldn't this be put off = until after the HK
> > workshop in case a hardfork is decided on=3F Or have we = de-coupled it from
> the
> > release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an = update for it
> > too)=3F
>
> In principle, =22feature freeze=22 means that any large code = changes will no
> longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.
>
> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK = workshop
> I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before = code
> makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to = decouple
> consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
>
> We've seen lot of release date drift due to =22this and this = change needs to
> make it in=22 in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a = time-based
> instead of feature-based release schedule.
>
> We can always do a 0.12.1.
>
> Wladimir
> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@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/attachm= ents/20151001/5dca9e61/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:17:52 +0100
From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
Message-ID:
<CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n=5FajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=3Dw=3DrLhmOkJhfQg@mail.= gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the = SemVer spec=3F
>

We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance = releases
are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachm= ents/20151001/dc91562f/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200
From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
Message-ID:
<CAAUq4861Wd2c42gVy7SoW9414R8RGY+Yzp7rDtzagrwQewnFWg@mail.gmail.= com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D=22utf-8=22

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>


I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.= 0

I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.

2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>:

> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev = <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the = SemVer spec=3F
>>
>
> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance = releases
> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachm= ents/20151001/17164b7e/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:56:55 +0200
From: =22Wladimir J. van der Laan=22 <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
Message-ID: <20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8

On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:
> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0

I'll interpret the question as =22why is the Bitcoin Core software = still <1.0.0=22. Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the = block/transaction versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest = network protocol version is 70011.=20

Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. = They just count up, every half year.

Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software = mature enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all = of which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing = a number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.

Wladimir


------------------------------

=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2
*****************************************


------Nodemailer-0.5.0-?=_1-1443695156323--