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 A2D85A18 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 21:27:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3412587 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 21:27:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.50.29] ([69.50.179.106]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MaaOf-1a3CzE3IL3-00KBvY; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 23:27:34 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) From: Peter R In-Reply-To: <1819769.E416F0XigG@garp> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 14:27:30 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9269B3FB-2ED2-469D-9FE2-783CC2EB252C@gmx.com> References: <2081461.sDX5ARzIdv@garp> <1819769.E416F0XigG@garp> To: Tom Zander X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ggRu46IhQT5SeAvp/djjvBCxDSIRnhODgtjVRXvDLTQbtqvIL15 4PmIy25fY6NGY+jWlfKra41Y5yBoLKc/5Db3JbyBd+khLi3X7gWV/6PCDhcdK17Zc9EK+Wg dzxv2u6lQHOUccyV5f50n4zcv/BM9dMuomZnoKiQmGpsz/RjjW/6BqqIGHRWAmO2r/DDNV9 zLm19r+lU2ggxJQiKzJeA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:kPkU/rZARmA=:Xsrd25NNi/ZIK1zpdDZl3x HMKMwb69IzZotj4I9BMoj8FckToDT0OBvVkyxmXWLI6xPKhAbcFXxPHv143Rdb65UaV7mYpzT Aq8z+PNPQNw/2Uf9JbnWkOBueFuoiC5irMviPmNXdTVFiikndCL9U/tekj7xtfix701FYDa6m MdJStklrmSzfEQZao5gVduegW8+Aioe9LNTggbO+ph4ezbwiYB3aupEYYaCPKhBqw8cI73rd9 DY7WhiNZ7B1NHrtpqhW6RZUNySVunluLs5Kih5Hbuqs9Wq/NXQSHsAGZMBi/dz2ldxyqVyAZ8 LlxRTUtwbYpfhupfUlykjkqo448pPjTAFOYZJmUbz89BG51mKqhWdR4652tN2U5HCdlALpGu2 PVPrYz8ydnGX2E/Ga3JkbavZn3PlZ2FEml/TXukTuDwRqMIAwOvZoJP56z4sg+wxZAEqAnMaQ 6fi7GFWxge6YyrvyNlwESvzs0RvkcmqXXo1m88f+IGmkO0OP+S5p3Yfh8BsY9hT+ZsNTpIo5D GUQK0f6gGdAO+tltwv/vsZCMdy+64wrPuRBV3vjQeGLGPpGkXXb77ddG2F4aZRD4j+1hpavUG nqTyJGkqLEYF+WDWwZQ3XIYRAmJO/QENsS9s06O3betyC4pfGcrdQv04B1Bp3fgcAc/7oWpOd kyF9fzo5eeDG1eUJIkeNQu3GmVoBVNgEk23FbHSJz/e7C3IVHcLZU5XXc9YmS5X++Yz7h87Rk fohy3s+nIBGQI9pW9UIVEsAIl7wE/k9YE7IX34/ox80jWxQZQWVg3fXeTvdE1TFqSgprMVWzW HSR2TFx X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] This thread is not about the soft/hard fork technical debate 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: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 21:27:37 -0000 > On Oct 5, 2015, at 2:08 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev = wrote: > On Monday 5. October 2015 20.56.34 Gregory Maxwell wrote: >> (In this case, I don't even believe we have any regulator >> contributors that disagree). >=20 > Regular contributor? >=20 > Please explain how for a fork in the protocol should you only listen = to=20 > regular Bitcoin Core contributors? Furthermore, Bitcoin is significantly more than a "software project": it = sits at a unique intersection of computer science, economics, physics, = law and more. While I agree that minor bug-fixes and = code-maintenance-type issues should be dealt with quietly by developers, = decisions regarding Bitcoin=E2=80=99s governance and its evolution = should be shaped by an interdisciplinary group of stakeholders from = across the community. The hard- vs soft-fork debate is not just a code = maintenance issue. =20 Once again, let=E2=80=99s use the current gridlock in Core to rally the = growth of new forkwise-compatible implementations of the protocol. = Gavin and Mike=E2=80=99s initiative with BIP101 and Bitcoin XT should be = encouraged as one possible model for coming to consensus on hard-forking = changes. =20 Best regards, Peter