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 08C8A1648 for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.196]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90CBF63 for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-f182.google.com ([209.85.223.182]) by mrelay.perfora.net (mreueus001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LwYMD-1ajtq82EFr-018Gsc for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 13:00:27 +0200 Received: by ioii196 with SMTP id i196so171145083ioi.3 for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 04:00:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.135.196 with SMTP id r65mr21312746ioi.131.1443438026654; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 04:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.32.164 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 04:00:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150927185031.GA20599@savin.petertodd.org> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:00:26 -0400 Message-ID: From: Adam Back To: Mike Hearn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:WpoN3Kexr7a63iEHLqxO/afhcdY8OycgE000IoBraO/G8+uyz0C ODIUzyxjsNYWAnLqvP38tLbdzSPQmFc+LplW3xNkWZg47Q2rDWvrS8cQgRzHFp7anseXXPa Iww/y+1oNShqWn10VQuzJpNPNKK8jLrjUsXDQ/g/YIX0b0zVD0BY0I8F63vKL/qdshn4pLZ XSAUem8RxuYa1MW5DxEMw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:bbWumf6DNWg=:g9w81EQg7zZkQJi/rdygTS uUC29dxd3yHVuoJh1D7C6PMxAvF7auw9F83YMYom8+I4nTvmcUAHnE7OzjTwY9g8vBeDWIFVD 5irOoT4mFzrKdslQ2SASOGtzFFi5ymbuivyW2mGeQvxzH6Z44Sqdv9DQ/UaD/AOQP5T0BRyEt ESOQ4POsbp4Gff71pKEtqZnhcoxpDke/RNfjCpBpe8V/h6v5suQtcUacMk15+/oDdhi0fo68D iFeZBCz08jE7HlN9ROQ8ROqB+lYuB6iqbYggk1xaJHBloAoLJCZ1GoUX+f5BGpn3BXIKQSL4t cSWZ480OH8sHWlf2iv/7Ib8zN1vnNgkDYxmQuLAzfN8CGzYukpoqlZfnFp1W6t8x1vn76ZJNa wvASuZA7HJVZWvoqBgZiw34eNjVfnIhQ0e/JUKegst5UfEEJs2YFNk5YCmUoUqxR4L/CTCA+M NzqStRzMT2tCKeyY8enU+vPuRPt71VPUtYqsxeqGXFXCu93YapVjwes9nIOnJa9uvjtWOGfKP qTUPXx1j0dGJ/yRii75oTM7d5KvzYXHvye6Pp1n+R26FWfVGTo6VCPN+5f2fxsOxAObaEAVcm CzKOGQT1Ng7gGIRb5jl8mBANBni5naFBJa4jtOSu+9cp7OXq8To6UsgvMjygpvtFb/dExVIw/ nWRnVzbUche6Ybw8ZybSK+L01/MJTdGBjgzdH6J2BbpbP55f46wlrxmsSZrfgnvgUs0/UVfyj NiFHNL7L//2LdgwU X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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] Let's deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY! 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, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:29 -0000 I wonder what Gavin's views are, he's usually constructive, and see if he'll include it in XT - I think he may have said he was supportive. The rationale for soft vs hard-forks is well known, so I wont go over them. Adam On 28 September 2015 at 06:48, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev wrote: > There is no consensus on using a soft fork to deploy this feature. It will > result in the same problems as all the other soft forks - SPV wallets will > become less reliable during the rollout period. I am against that, as it's > entirely avoidable. > > Make it a hard fork and my objection will be dropped. > > Until then, as there is no consensus, you need to do one of two things: > > 1) Drop the "everyone must agree to make changes" idea that people here like > to peddle, and do it loudly, so everyone in the community is correctly > informed > > 2) Do nothing > > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >