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 1W4H0e-0000Kh-HV for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 21:31:24 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1W4H0d-0002Xf-O5 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 21:31:24 +0000 Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 296F3108083E; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 21:31:38 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luke-Jr" To: Jeff Garzik Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 21:31:15 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.2; x86_64; ; ) References: <201401171841.37790.luke@dashjr.org> 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: <201401172131.16598.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1W4H0d-0002Xf-O5 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin Core 0.9rc1 release schedule 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, 17 Jan 2014 21:31:24 -0000 On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:53:47 PM Jeff Garzik wrote: > BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in upstream. > > I think the main hurdle to merging was that various people disagreed > on various edge case handling and implementation details, but no > fundamental objections. Heck, even I disagree with implementation details, but it's still better than nothing. We can always merge major reorganisations/reimplementations later when they're written: merging this one doesn't mean we're stuck with it forever... Luke