From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VXgPA-0000md-Hh for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 23:58:00 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org designates 62.13.148.112 as permitted sender) client-ip=62.13.148.112; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org; helo=outmail148112.authsmtp.co.uk; Received: from outmail148112.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.148.112]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1VXgP9-0005Ut-9B for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 23:58:00 +0000 Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235]) by punt9.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id r9JNvplf051999; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 00:57:51 +0100 (BST) Received: from savin (76-10-178-109.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.178.109]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r9JNvkkS009979 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 20 Oct 2013 00:57:49 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 19:57:46 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Jean-Paul Kogelman Message-ID: <20131019235746.GA29032@savin> References: <38895569-E6E1-4576-9E36-B00B53F9D3CC@me.com> <201310192229.19932.luke@dashjr.org> <19909B49-0895-4130-99FB-9A116140CFE9@me.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19909B49-0895-4130-99FB-9A116140CFE9@me.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Server-Quench: 4291598e-391a-11e3-b802-002590a15da7 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aQdMdAIUF1YAAgsB AmUbW1ReVVp7XGM7 bAxPbAVDY01GQQRq WVdMSlVNFUsqCGZ/ QEVFMRlyfgxBcTBx Y0diXj5fXk17cE91 F1NXHGxXeGZhPWMC AkhYdR5UcAFPdx8U a1UrBXRDAzANdhES HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA4iVjUm RgwDBCgiVUoLDy8y MxchK1hUG14cNA0p NkY7Ul95OBgXDxBY Hl1caMDP X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 76.10.178.109/587 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: dashjr.org] -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1VXgP9-0005Ut-9B Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community 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: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 23:58:00 -0000 --ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 04:35:13PM -0700, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > >> See BIP 1 for the process.. proposals go to this mailing list first. > >=20 > > FWIW, he did post to the mailing list and he got an underwhelming respo= nse: > >=20 > > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=3D20ec1e35-305= 1-45d6-b449-e4a4d5c06dc8%40me.com&forum_name=3Dbitcoin-development >=20 > Although I agree that the number of responses on the mailing list was min= imal, they were overall positive. Mike voiced concerns about not having a d= ate field to limit the rescan when importing, but other than that, most of = the discussion was on bitcointalk. I've made a number of revisions, trying = to incorporate the suggestions that were given. Obviously this doesn't mean= that the draft is final (specifically the KDF's that can be used is still = up for debate and having 29 undefined ID's means it's reasonably future pro= of). >=20 > Having it on the BIP page doesn't make it any more official, I agree, but= it does increase its exposure and will hopefully spark some more discussio= n. Having it on the BIP page *does* make it more official, at least the way we've been using the BIP page, which is to filter out the proposals that haven't gotten much support at all. (or maybe are just controversial) FWIW I myself haven't pushed hard for getting an "official" BIP number for my draft NODE_BLOOM BIP, even though I've got support from most of the dev team on the pull-request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2900 I'm probably at the point where I could get one assigned - Litecoin for instance has made that change - but really I just see that as a formality; that it's still a controversial idea is much more relevant. In any case I don't see any working code in your email, I'd suggest writing some. You're BIP would be much more likely to be accepted if you were more involved in wallet development. --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000ad5e0cbc9438203b9cf2dcae776774f59575e38fcefa802ed --ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQGrBAEBCACVBQJSYxx5XhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMGFkNWUwY2JjOTQzODIwM2I5Y2YyZGNhZTc3Njc3NGY1OTU3 NWUzOGZjZWZhODAyZWQvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0 ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQJIFAPaXwkfvrxAgAvo3fKPYw6eFYnU2E4RI3FJ0E US1VL4GWxu7cjzwrJCCa27Lk87OaYYs21NldVohNd89zM/QeeQzIJPYLazaEUmMK yih4933+/pyYb5gOaD7Ub+fkXLJ4qqq9FLz10t1X8U8uWsE/uuEYCSpS36BEIAcj CNhq6VWNRK1ftGWPDmdySIU9ddGDV3dNhjXeygL2ayl1bBHefZFXDYwtCFhW7Rvm QXSvBjDOJRCMCRglx6nVxH1dnPYih08UBhTEsJC39iMEYhaPNOuegt3Aoqg0H4LS zJT0RYkGTevw8kSIbrHjXwF5djiSLqll78FEc6rE1lLTwTJa/21y/8EZdF33CA== =y+4E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q--