From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: alicexbt <alicexbt@protonmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
alicexbt via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, "dave@dtrt.org" <dave@dtrt.org>
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Automatically reverting ("transitory") soft forks, e.g. for CTV
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2022 17:22:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4516A563-CF6E-4AF1-8449-318EDCE177B2@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <R95icCQeG6oNu4uNppxVTceaMmZzOQhUD40HhOXkuQCOzUY_P5uM1F1AGBejdydrSjl4RYE538VWiDHeGx3YcaS0S-z_q9v5UaCK_Y4b5TE=@protonmail.com>
On April 21, 2022 5:10:02 AM GMT+02:00, alicexbt via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>@DavidHarding
>
>Interesting proposal to revert consensus changes. Is it possible to do this for soft forks that are already activated?
>
>Example: Some users are not okay with witness discount in segwit transactions
>
>https://nitter.net/giacomozucco/status/1513614380121927682
That specific case isn't a good example as reverting the discount would actually be a soft fork, as it is a tightening of existing rules. In fact, it'd be a block size decrease.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-24 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-21 1:04 [bitcoin-dev] Automatically reverting ("transitory") soft forks, e.g. for CTV David A. Harding
2022-04-21 2:05 ` Luke Dashjr
2022-04-21 3:10 ` alicexbt
2022-04-21 5:56 ` Luke Dashjr
2022-04-21 6:20 ` Jeremy Rubin
2022-04-21 6:37 ` Luke Dashjr
2022-04-21 13:10 ` Jeremy Rubin
2022-04-24 15:22 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2022-04-21 14:58 ` Matt Corallo
2022-04-21 18:06 ` David A. Harding
2022-04-21 18:39 ` Matt Corallo
2022-04-21 22:28 ` David A. Harding
2022-04-21 23:02 ` Matt Corallo
2022-04-22 1:20 ` David A. Harding
2022-04-22 18:40 ` Matt Corallo
2022-04-22 18:49 ` Corey Haddad
2022-04-22 16:48 ` James O'Beirne
2022-04-22 17:06 ` James O'Beirne
2022-04-22 16:28 ` James O'Beirne
2022-04-22 17:25 ` [bitcoin-dev] Vaulting (Was: Automatically reverting ("transitory") soft forks) Russell O'Connor
2022-04-23 4:56 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-04-23 14:02 ` Russell O'Connor
2022-04-23 18:24 ` Matt Corallo
2022-04-23 19:30 ` Russell O'Connor
2022-04-24 23:03 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-04-25 17:27 ` Nadav Ivgi
2022-04-25 22:27 ` Russell O'Connor
2022-04-27 1:52 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-04-28 23:14 ` Nadav Ivgi
2022-04-28 23:51 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-04-22 18:35 ` [bitcoin-dev] Automatically reverting ("transitory") soft forks, e.g. for CTV Matt Corallo
2022-04-21 19:08 ` Jeremy Rubin
2022-04-22 0:28 ` Anthony Towns
2022-04-22 1:44 ` David A. Harding
2022-04-22 19:57 ` Antoine Riard
2022-04-25 5:12 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-04-22 19:05 alicexbt
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=4516A563-CF6E-4AF1-8449-318EDCE177B2@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd.org \
--cc=alicexbt@protonmail.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dave@dtrt.org \
--cc=luke@dashjr.org \
/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