From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UGaDl-0002lQ-9j for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:23:17 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1UGaDg-0001Uv-Mp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:23:17 +0000 Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [173.170.142.26]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2A9427A2965; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:23:05 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luke-Jr" To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:23:00 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.7.3-gentoo; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <201303131256.30144.luke@dashjr.org> <51411744.6010908@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201303151923.02247.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -2.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1UGaDg-0001Uv-Mp Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.8.1 ideas X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:23:17 -0000 On Friday, March 15, 2013 5:06:20 PM Benjamin Lindner wrote: > On Mar 13, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Cameron Garnham wrote: > > For me, everyone signed up to bitcoin thinking that there was a 1MB / > > block limit. The lock limits were unexpected, and could be considered > > extremely uncontroversial to remove. > > This. Software behavior which is not described by the source code should > not be considered an integral part of the rule set. Any influence of > external libraries on the consensus mechanism is unacceptable. Note that the lock limits were explicitly set in the bitcoind source code.