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 84456D20 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:51:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qg0-f51.google.com (mail-qg0-f51.google.com [209.85.192.51]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B198106 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:51:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qgec40 with SMTP id c40so82175637qge.2 for ; Wed, 09 Dec 2015 06:51:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gCmOzpljAR687yujdauO2/oxBxTJWv5OWd/XVGRkKYk=; b=sdsKJrAtD7hivNLa6TMhYwn9X6qka75JHzpZMGIfb0FJH4858FA2/R1zgMsWI7t/Ef tmIpUOYohco7KLRA7TwvXWMuD4U9IXzEo3tg8hQh+YxXpYAShm86ncJh2c7R1whq9mCx PlNkHIYdgGfnnqQH+0mYVBtu0gdPyCpDGuQsPojEUHeG2d/VrcSO7rprrgWRCI1ydo1b l/Z26FlQl0eaMruXCqDxJVZQo4OttTgzKMzNumxOREsJlE4fPorUNmA0Dp14PBGvR/6y TDlTuLOQilz3klKKpIVEx9QBQjD1+pn5OFKub9yeFzzdhKiZJM9bjZ1iWzB2g1oSJseX VLQg== X-Received: by 10.140.17.213 with SMTP id 79mr7840542qgd.49.1449672698310; Wed, 09 Dec 2015 06:51:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18d:8301:36e:6e29:95ff:fe0a:833b? ([2601:18d:8301:36e:6e29:95ff:fe0a:833b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l31sm3945956qge.22.2015.12.09.06.51.37 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 09 Dec 2015 06:51:37 -0800 (PST) To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: <20151208110752.GA31180@amethyst.visucore.com> From: Chris Message-ID: <56683FF8.5070003@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 09:51:36 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, 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: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 16:13:33 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 14:51:39 -0000 On 12/08/2015 10:12 AM, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Why segwitness as a soft fork? Stuffing the segwitness merkle tree in > the coinbase is messy and will just complicate consensus-critical code > (as opposed to making the right side of the merkle tree in > block.version=5 blocks the segwitness data). Agreed. I thought the rule was no contentious hark forks. It seems hardly anyone opposes this change and there seems to be widespread agreement that the hardfork version would be much cleaner.