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 79012BBE for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:28:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com (mail-wi0-f175.google.com [209.85.212.175]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C03CE1D6 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:28:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicgi11 with SMTP id gi11so36788376wic.0 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 04:28:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=v0vh3YljewwnhM6NPugpOs+Ovvr0avS+qF+mAmqLsaY=; b=Y0GciIeAgogMofNpCHBJnYG96chV82YE9HW9r5IWK9mwIOjO9ixC1Zb49ikjc4WFop 8J5Ml7S+JZ4VgjYyqq07P52u6iTt3Br0hJW7j8xgVkT+/3vLb7WRVUnOTJSjmq1zX4MX HDHe2ewKCBMDC7eFPidJ2qCA9odGDUiVRl0lS4IwcX6YKHVurYUCpUxfIV3dErGTLhhe CHbClN9g7gJg7zavYfszTbjQHRI1xCGIO98ijxRKfHBuDiuhvd0R+emzsnygsLTltit6 VfuUOkTvWcPKO+DeeU6CnnMlF/9wlJIzghd0hOFYXUCm7RQi3accTywTtPx0X3fDr3P/ dznw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmFtPJU72k1c4AqnT78UFog9WImiSvqOAhhl1cgzX7gZM6SOewsvEpUgcSLgYQLp7R+bFkv MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.77.136 with SMTP id s8mr5167891wiw.7.1435404530468; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 04:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.95.168 with HTTP; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 04:28:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <558D46EC.6050300@bitcoins.info> References: <558B7352.90708@bitcoins.info> <558D46EC.6050300@bitcoins.info> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 13:28:50 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Milly Bitcoin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Process and Votes 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: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:28:52 -0000 On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Milly Bitcoin wrote: > Without looking up specific links I am confident people like Mircea Popescu > will oppose just about any change. Maybe they don't post their objection to > Github but the point I am making is that no matter what change you make > someone, somewhere will be against it. Some of the developers think that > Github is the only place that matters and that the only opinions that matter > is a tiny group of insiders. I don't think that way which is the reasoning > behind my statement. Yes, I understand that it may be difficult to define "uncontroversial", as I explain in http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008936.html > I have seen things like a Github discussion between 3 or 4 people > and then Garzik send out a tweet that there is near universal approval for > the proposed change as it nobody is allowed to question it. After watching > the github process for a couple years I simply don't trust it because the > developers in charge have a dictatorial style and they shut out many > stakeholders instead of soliciting their opinions. Can you provide anything to back your claim? Note that even if that's true, still, Bitcoin core != Bitcoin consensus rules. > I view the Github system > as the biggest centralized choke-point in Bitcoin and probably its biggest > threat to its continued survival. Anyone can come in and hire a couple core > developers and veto any change they don't want. Well, yes, github is centralized and so it is bitcoin core development. But bitcoin core developers don't decide hardfork changes. So far, softfork changes have been made because they have been considered "uncontroversial", not because there's any centralized negotiating table or voting process to decide when to force every user to adapt their software to new consensus rules.