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 D04FB4A3 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 21:50:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail149077.authsmtp.com (outmail149077.authsmtp.com [62.13.149.77]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F274012A for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 21:50:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c247.authsmtp.com (mail-c247.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.247]) by punt24.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id v6HLon3H016559; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 22:50:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com [52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id v6HLoiYv085704 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 22:50:45 +0100 (BST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99E0740173; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 21:50:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D71D820605; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 17:50:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 17:50:38 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Alex Morcos , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20170717215038.GB8227@fedora-23-dvm> References: <0119661e-a11a-6d4b-c9ec-fd510bd4f144@gmail.com> <01194110-04f0-82f5-cd5e-0101822fa2b1@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Dxnq1zWXvFF0Q93v" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Server-Quench: fcbd259d-6b39-11e7-b1e8-0015176ca198 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aQdMdwUUEkAYAgsB AmEbWVZeVV17XWY7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq T0pMXVMcUgMQfUNY b1geWhx1dwEIeX5y Zk8sCCMJCEZ/fBJg RBxXHHAHZDJndTIe BUhFdwNVdQJNeEwU a1l3GhFYa3VsNCMk FAgyOXU9MCtqYBlN TggRLFQdCVoLE3YH TBkGHDMgVXcCTik2 JgRuGWMEEE8NP3Ba X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1038:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 02:31:27 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Updating the Scaling Roadmap [Update] X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 21:50:53 -0000 --Dxnq1zWXvFF0Q93v Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 02:49:22PM -0400, Alex Morcos via bitcoin-dev wrote: > "it was ACKed by everyone else that I heard from" - I don't think you > should read into that much. >=20 > I felt like this whole conversation was putting the cart before the horse. > You might very well have some good ideas in your roadmap update, to tell > you the truth, I didn't even read it. > But I don't think we should be taking relatively new/untested ideas such = as > Drivechain and sticking them on a roadmap. There is a tendency in this > community to hear about the latest and greatest idea and immediately fixa= te > on it as our salvation. I'm very happy that you are doing this work and > that others are researching a wide variety of ideas. But please, lets be > conservative and flexible with how we evolve Bitcoin. We don't even know > if or when we'll get segwit yet. Agreed! A closely related example is my own Treechains work, which got a bunch of excitement when I first published the idea. But would I have wanted it on a roadmap? Hell no: sure enough, as it got more peer review others (and mysel= f!) found that it was going to be a harder than it initially looked to actually= get into production. Drivechains is definitely in that situation right now. Also don't forget that proper security peer review takes a *lot* of work. I myself have a todo list item to respond to Paul's post on Drivechains, but I need to spend a few days to do that and just haven't had the time (not to mention that no-one is paying me to do general Bitcoin dev work right now). --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --Dxnq1zWXvFF0Q93v Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJZbTEsAAoJECSBQD2l8JH7M7QIAKU6za0M6Z7Bv8H6oezfbeAl 5eYKPl8Br/aF6rLVYLZn5SLTFFmY477iubprkI624saMu+WaBMFM2bHs9BK0ITu8 MrK/ogI9+CkNgScpnawwIHHop9G58K1Boz/Rdltgfun5+tduXVmsXv6x3yF261mv Dr2ZYwWroP7d2IpAXZxxI2gr6iOKd7KZBm+nt8WunTYnqZoF89OP6zAJ8CZpFpTQ ZzXGBs1ohNw+R4evobxfTGD2Przoles2JFO5RwDRWLs8Rvc8hLKGkiUh66VCwRr4 QkZzwiaXLQuD/uUcHE/NcWZsTkxF7CwNy/0KKVBdvzUxQyAFcnD8ThIWBb1phKI= =ANOZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Dxnq1zWXvFF0Q93v--