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 417839CA for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:20:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com (mail-wi0-f174.google.com [209.85.212.174]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD9B413D for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:20:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicja10 with SMTP id ja10so9883275wic.1 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 07:20:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Dppm3DaTAjITVRfjScs1Ts0vmRsJ/1jZJn28z0yNsU0=; b=g5U6HRwh48cxazzgZjtMoq2ETG85Q0HG3VEXeaXQTQheKogl9GtKzFnSN9Qont17Sk TWjVwSQTt1JPMpjWVvBvLyEPBu9FHyKX29c6jb4N0XrxxBBi97XTbhXdD7tElfXOIPbx qde6qh0G3u11xhKEQlYVk5bk2TAfujgWZgQ4ueKkNJPhyJE9rpvBj3g8EmCn1AJ+mJPQ eUcjJWcOLrJXXlAnFP4BcfOaCQ1XwiB3vwAsjYaSFcK4GzgIfMhBkEUqW8B5DICmHdeR D3zN4cjcVquQ5wWwyzitEO5gCNj8TYCMuLDiqZFXvaFV7iB1TWVhSbRc4IhbUhBIzTRG BmRQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.238.39 with SMTP id vh7mr23422953wjc.109.1439994025478; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 07:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.28.52.84 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 07:20:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 10:20:25 -0400 Message-ID: From: Jeff Garzik To: Btc Drak Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0141aa1a5e0f88051daabc9a X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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] Separated bitcoin-consensus mailing list (was Re: Bitcoin XT Fork) 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, 19 Aug 2015 14:20:28 -0000 --089e0141aa1a5e0f88051daabc9a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable bitcoin-dev for protocol discussion and bitcoin-core for Bitcoin Core discussion? As Jorge notes, a general discussion list has existed for a long time with little use. On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wrot= e: > >> Apparently that existed already: >> http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/ >> But technical people run away from noise while non-technical people >> chase them wherever their voices sounds more loud. >> > > Regarding disruptors, if there are clear rules about what is acceptable o= n > -dev, one can simply moderate out offenders. It's absolutely necessary we > have a forum where we can share and discuss purely academic and technical > matters. No-one can accuse censorship because all moderation would say > would be to "take it to the other list". It's essential for all people wh= o > are developing and maintaining Bitcoin protocol software, or services tha= t > rely on it. The mailing list used to be very low volume. > > While we are at it, we should also think about a bitcoin-announce read > only list which consumers of Bitcoin Core can subscribe for announcements > about new versions of Bitcoin Core, and any critical warnings. Miners and > service providers would particularly benefit from this. The list is > moderated so only say Bitcoin Core commit engineers are allowed to post. > > >> One thing that I would like though, is separating Bitcoin >> Core-specific development from general bips and consensus discussions. >> > > The potential downside is too much separation becomes confusing although = I > would not oppose such a change. My own suggestion would be try just a -de= v > and -discuss list and see how that goes first. It used to work well. > Whatever the case I am very confident we need a general discussion mailin= g > list. > > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > --089e0141aa1a5e0f88051daabc9a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
bitcoin-dev for protocol discussion and bitcoin-core for B= itcoin Core discussion?

As Jorge notes, a general discus= sion list has existed for a long time with little use.

=

On Wed, Aug= 19, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev <bitcoi= n-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3= n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote:
Apparently that existed already: http://sourceforge.net/p/= bitcoin/mailman/
But technical people run away from noise while non-technical people
chase them wherever their voices sounds more loud.
Regarding disruptors, if there are clear rules about wha= t is acceptable on -dev, one can simply moderate out offenders. It's ab= solutely necessary we have a forum where we can share and discuss purely ac= ademic and technical matters. No-one can accuse censorship because all mode= ration would say would be to "take it to the other list". It'= s essential for all people who are developing and maintaining Bitcoin proto= col software, or services that rely on it. The mailing list used to be very= low volume.

While we are at it, we should also th= ink about a bitcoin-announce read only list which consumers of Bitcoin Core= can subscribe for announcements about new versions of Bitcoin Core, and an= y critical warnings. Miners and service providers would particularly benefi= t from this. The list is moderated so only say Bitcoin Core commit engineer= s are allowed to post.=C2=A0
=C2=A0
One thing that I would like though, is separating Bitcoin
Core-specific development from general bips and consensus discussions.
<= /blockquote>

The potential downside is too much s= eparation becomes confusing although I would not oppose such a change. My o= wn suggestion would be try just a -dev and -discuss list and see how that g= oes first. It used to work well. Whatever the case I am very confident we n= eed a general discussion mailing list.



_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


--089e0141aa1a5e0f88051daabc9a--