public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Process: Status, comments, and copyright licenses
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 19:41:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201602021941.25382.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDokB9-kxZJ4-xgyo9FsXDpRRLbn7BkZfb_VEDQ_rwNnQg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tuesday, February 02, 2016 5:38:59 PM Jorge Timón wrote:
> In the section
> https://github.com/luke-jr/bips/blob/bip-biprevised/bip-biprevised.mediawi
> ki#formally-defining-consensus
> 
> Can we please find another term for the "consensus" here (which is
> often confused with "consensus rules", "consensus code" etc)?
> In BIP99 I used the term "uncontroversial", but I'm happy to change it
> to something else if that helps us moving away from consistently using
> the same term for two related but very different concepts.
> "nearly universal acceptance", "ecosystem-harmonious"...seriously,
> almost anything would be better than keep overloading "consensus"...

"Uncontroversial" doesn't really express the correct idea.

There has been a lot of confusion over "consensus rules/code" anyway, so while 
we're on the subject of terminology, I would suggest we change *that* use of 
"consensus" instead to clear up the confusion. It would probably work quite 
well to rename it to "concord rules/code", and leave "consensus" for 
describing the actual process by which humans agree on changes to the concord.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this subject?

Luke

(Note Core currently has "consensus" only 249 times, most of which are simply 
identifier names, so it would be trivial to make this change.)


  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-02 19:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-01 22:53 [bitcoin-dev] BIP Process: Status, comments, and copyright licenses Luke Dashjr
2016-02-02  5:50 ` Dave Scotese
2016-02-02  7:54   ` Luke Dashjr
2016-02-02 16:00     ` Dave Scotese
2016-02-02 15:58 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-02-02 17:38   ` Jorge Timón
2016-02-02 19:41     ` Luke Dashjr [this message]
     [not found]       ` <CAGLBAhdFo2pXcDfvPCTpm7ufQuG8z4mHsdoidGkhB3q5SWLj=A@mail.gmail.com>
2016-02-03  0:03         ` Luke Dashjr
2016-02-03  0:59           ` Jorge Timón
2016-02-02 19:08   ` Luke Dashjr
2016-03-10  0:37   ` Mustafa Al-Bassam
2016-02-04  4:15 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-02-04 17:45   ` Ryan Grant
2016-02-04 21:17     ` Luke Dashjr
2016-02-05  0:09       ` Ryan Grant
2016-02-02  6:35 Ryan Grant

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201602021941.25382.luke@dashjr.org \
    --to=luke@dashjr.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jtimon@jtimon.cc \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox