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 B45FFA74 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 23:36:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-yw0-f177.google.com (mail-yw0-f177.google.com [209.85.161.177]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C77F16A for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 23:36:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f177.google.com with SMTP id l21so3081911ywb.1 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:36:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=2KvmeMg5DdJoHvw1aDyAf41YmR2Swvq+JLu+BIiVr0g=; b=AVpqHpCcAiPdoqzE+28vI3wF1xaygKRlBkG4iRvp6Fsh09PDh8YOEAn9sMlYYsHV5j wX6AMqI8Mmwz7i+pp3YZhQSvsNYX098rB+FzKiVQzYWvXO4lrpzbrzv4A+YNrvsaAvVM Fp3KlqDg7GkbN/G2pgaP7Gdg1mY9NlGN0N3c7NQ68ByO6gMio3g/0w9c3Jq52SiQFWqj fcSuOuEucecwAqHo7ugCnxuWFx63nrjGRtXXXokADV82v6+aZ6s5OH/kufp1aHTWygPT RuYCuIrIPEgUjW9Q5+LIiDayug9fVe5PMNBqgtFDsoYzs1URFOfMiFu//7Emvppm5eV7 a6HA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=2KvmeMg5DdJoHvw1aDyAf41YmR2Swvq+JLu+BIiVr0g=; b=TENXcz9nthpWVK8jjzTMqKe4u7yvoxZqSMFHbNc6GD3lr/JY04KHRDdi/BPWoT7fke aZkESTr3UxL8EpS+/fWbzd5ra3moVPukNo4P4/YFSx8Dkb0e6G9iOrpGxblX9usyE3Bx ESS6BR+kCYoaPxQXF/tfuE8xQgieEPCG2qIumsIIjTJla1cLpfWqz6mvPZTIWZwsy8RE R84OBcZD+tjqndTVS8mVduNFPqNpCUPbZ/zVuxVirwHvN5OZKoNmk8yqPMaAeThl9pqw 2ZM+E53KHCUhOC8uuq6zGavMt6IEVPViycycIt37TKVfpfGk+uxZ+QaqyZ6k/TlfoeJ3 wpRg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw113grbTon4fN5xSZgAMpk+dkmeAwa7Uj4r4KVwvZRR9PfkqtEEkN hzKYoBI9iVrhg/nQgxnQyuIFCoFPxQ== X-Received: by 10.129.51.77 with SMTP id z74mr539834ywz.184.1499816173319; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:36:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.71.4 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:36:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1c1d06a9-2e9f-5b2d-42b7-d908ada4b09e@gmail.com> References: <0119661e-a11a-6d4b-c9ec-fd510bd4f144@gmail.com> <1c1d06a9-2e9f-5b2d-42b7-d908ada4b09e@gmail.com> From: Bryan Bishop Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 18:36:12 -0500 Message-ID: To: Paul Sztorc , Gregory Maxwell , Bryan Bishop , Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no 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, 11 Jul 2017 23:36:26 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Updating the Scaling Roadmap 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: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 23:36:14 -0000 I can't help but notice that I have read Greg's email before-- all the way back in 2016. It would have been impossible for him to write a reply to Paul's current email back then... but I also notice that Greg did not indicate that he was copy-pasting until the very end (and even then his aside at the end was sort of not the most clear it could have been I think). On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Paul Sztorc via bitcoin-dev wrote: > On 7/11/2017 5:11 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: >> [ Note 1: I think it is important to disclose that several of the >> items in this list appear to be more or less quoted out of my own >> blockstream-internal descriptions of things we've been working on in >> Bitcoin. >> A while back Adam Back asked me to publish something which contained >> significant chunks of this document more or less verbatim, [ snip ] > I am not exactly sure what you are insinuating but I encourage you to > clarify it. I believe that's an artifact of a 2016 email. And the rest of it, for that matter. See below. >> and I >> declined saying that I personally disagree with some of his points and >> didn't think that Blockstream attempting to redirect the Bitcoin >> project (esp towards drivechains) was appropriate-- along with my >> (above) views on roadmaps (which I have included here a private email >> thread on the subject). I feel it's important to disclose this, and >> that the document was not otherwise created with the input of project >> contributors (except Luke-Jr, apparently). I wasn't previously aware >> that Adam had been working with Paul on this, had I been I would have >> also encouraged people to be a little more transparent about it. ] > I really don't understand what you are disclosing. That Adam asked you > for feedback on the draft? And then, in the next sentence, that not > enough experts were asked for feedback on the draft? I'm legitimately > confused by this part. > > As I stated, we can remove the drivechain section. But surely you can > appreciate how bizarre your position on roadmaps is. What exactly, did > you intended to create at [1]? Since it is described explicitly as "the > roadmap in Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system", have you been > disagreeing with it's characterization as a 'roadmap' this entire time? > One wonders why you haven't said anything until now. > > [1] https://bitcoincore.org/en/2015/12/21/capacity-increase/ The vast majority of Greg's email, including all the positiontext on roadmaps was mostly text sent on 2016-11-04 to Adam Back, myself, Wladimir, and others. Some of the other parts aren't, like the part mentioning Blockstream. Here is a commitment to a list of the recipients (for whatever good such a commitment might do): b1e575e15d86a5a5931ea0bc519701df4cc152f020f03cd7912074ce5c36260a - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507