From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <jtimon@jtimon.cc>) id 1Z6QDx-0002Vw-0c
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sat, 20 Jun 2015 21:22:49 +0000
Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com ([209.85.212.179])
	by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1Z6QDv-0004nR-Pq
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sat, 20 Jun 2015 21:22:48 +0000
Received: by wicgi11 with SMTP id gi11so44895120wic.0
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Sat, 20 Jun 2015 14:22:41 -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:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=rHFUIl7xfw7c3eu11V11gVMJSpADkBbeiCV6Z+vUewo=;
	b=FHznWtE+Uhp8wK41MIEjACWd73/0cc0yD3jdOrLi+7H4kZwvOKhgQ5Bm4eejWscPWv
	vNY+Fkah4mcX7sFkHmMgoCyliBfaCCTXrHRNbppukhzm7szzNYfdRw2XMTDWABrCikll
	BEbnu2Mpn1NolLz5YKCql1JKmVK4Qwgjha5jk2fRijZrmEBLKxZEvjUB9eq1gynZejhw
	+RCAxsiJ6UpxFnt9rl6mpsM6wTTtGp6h6nOhuoWHKCECQxYELh4+ouQTQSzdp16c5/3I
	bOJEOHhW6jZjl3qbxY0UMLwM2RBJAINnZg9BVo+iIuC11zy6xDXl0d2F7NswozsyczYb
	fT0g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnKvMS0p1hBszlDjvAqdp3VGnK+vvbMXEmmfPm7zqXG94nrQXuCnh74HDcpxRlou6adWyT1
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.99.166 with SMTP id er6mr18361208wib.58.1434835361737;
	Sat, 20 Jun 2015 14:22:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.139.235 with HTTP; Sat, 20 Jun 2015 14:22:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2015 23:22:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDqPBPiDG1BUAipEsLfyE1VFyvdqdoxtYjkKvGDvBQ8qMg@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	0.5 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1Z6QDv-0004nR-Pq
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] [BIP draft] Motivation and deployment of
	consensus rules changes ([soft/hard]forks)
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2015 21:22:49 -0000

This is an attempt to unify views on why and how hardforks can be
deployed. I would like to turn this into an informational BIP later
after gathering some feedback.

Please, do not discuss block size issues here: there's plenty of
threads to do so. The scope of this one is only hardforks and
softforks in a more abstract way. Sometimes block size changes are
used as examples because no other example came to mind
(non-blocksize-related examples for the same cases [or others] are
a user should be just ignored. But what if the welcomed), and
if we go into too much detail they stop being useful as examples. So
please, try to avoid going into too much detail about the concrete
examples when possible.

https://github.com/jtimon/bips/blob/bip-forks/bip-forks.org

Please, feel free to make suggestions or bike-shed some of the terms.