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 C0740A55 for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 18:20:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx-out02.mykolab.com (mx.kolabnow.com [95.128.36.1]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BB5CE8 for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 18:20:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kolabnow.com X-Spam-Score: -2.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx05.mykolab.com (mx05.mykolab.com [10.20.7.161]) by mx-out02.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DDB46198D for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:20:52 +0200 (CEST) From: Tom Zander To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:20:50 +0200 Message-ID: <2034434.4WpKWoeOrB@strawberry> In-Reply-To: <2d5abad7-cd9d-4396-4dd2-c687a1a808dc@vt.edu> References: <2d5abad7-cd9d-4396-4dd2-c687a1a808dc@vt.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 18:26:28 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Start time for BIP141 (segwit) 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: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 18:20:55 -0000 On Sunday, 16 October 2016 09:47:40 CEST Douglas Roark via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Would I want anyone to lose money due to faulty wallets? Of course not. > By the same token, devs have had almost a year to tinker with SegWit and > make sure the wallet isn't so poorly written that it'll flame out when > SegWit comes along. It's not like this is some untested, mostly unknown > feature that's being slipped out at the last minute There have been objections to the way that SegWit has been implemented for a long time, some wallets are taking a "wait and see" approach. If you look at the page you linked[1], that is a very very sad state of affairs. The vast majority is not ready. Would be interesting to get a more up-to-date view. Wallets probably won't want to invest resources adding support for a feature that will never be activated. The fact that we have a much safer alternative in the form of Flexible Transactions may mean it will not get activated. We won't know until its actually locked in. Wallets may not act until its actually locked in either. And I think we should respect that. Even if all wallets support it (and thats a big if), they need to be rolled out and people need to actually download those updates. This takes time, 2 months after the lock-in of SegWit would be the minimum safe time for people to actually upgrade. 1) https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/ -- Tom Zander Blog: https://zander.github.io Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel