📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18 📝 Original message:On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at ...

Jeff Garzik [ARCHIVE] /

npub1kf0…3f58

2023-06-07 15:38:31

in reply to nevent1q…0ml7

📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18
📝 Original message:On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Wladimir J. van der Laan <
> laanwj at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Like in any open source project there is lots of decision making ability
>> for code changes. I'd say look at the changelog for e.g. 0.11
>> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.11/doc/release-notes.md#0110-change-log,
>> or follow pull requests for a while, to see how many decisions about
>> changes are made from day to day. No, I'm not sitting on my hands, and so
>> is none of the other contributors that you'd like to get rid of.
>>
>
> The analogy goes further even. Even though I disagree with some of the
> changes you're making, I respect Mike's (and anyone's) right to make a fork
> of Bitcoin Core. That's how open source works: if people disagree with
> changes made or not made, they can maintain their own version. However:
>
>
>> Consensus changes are *much* more difficult, on the other hand. Even
>> relatively straightforward softforks come with a long discussion process
>> (see BIP62, BIP66). A hardfork is hard to do at the best of times (everyone
>> needs to upgrade their software!), and simply not possible if almost the
>> entire technical community disagrees with you.
>>
>
> Consensus changes - in particular hardforks - are not about making a
> change to the software. You are effectively asking users of the system to
> migrate to a new system. Perhaps one which is a philosophical successor to
> the old one, but a different system, with new rules that are incompatible
> with the old one.
>

Indeed. I think Mike is glossing over this major facet.

Consensus changes - worded another way - change Bitcoin's Constitution -
The Rules that everyone in the system is -forced- to follow, or be ignored
by the system.

Changing bitcoin's rules IS IN NO WAY like Wikipedia or other open source
software.

--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150618/4eec5ab0/attachment.html>;

Author Public Key

npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58

Show more details

Published at

2023-06-07 15:38:31

Kind type

1 Short Text Note

Event JSON

{ "id": "a21392aa6a50a4bfb4242d41649e9a31f25ef0f118c24f18c7b76362a7f054c7", "pubkey": "b25e10e25d470d9b215521b50da0dfe7a209bec7fedeb53860c3e180ffdc8c11", "created_at": 1686152311, "kind": 1, "tags": [ [ "e", "23c1bb2f25b9e7356b48aa2a86751c4f26fb3977b440917a1cb3512c200b0b2f", "", "root" ], [ "e", "d46c37278daff37b71b2ad66bbc940c20889ed5b2d9a58e10302024865d0aaa3", "", "reply" ], [ "p", "1b29d94ee81e1ee0479f1db4bc4ac887407bd470a0d7060e76f8ab27fdd57e50" ] ], "content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18\n📝 Original message:On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Pieter Wuille \u003cpieter.wuille at gmail.com\u003e\nwrote:\n\n\u003e On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Wladimir J. van der Laan \u003c\n\u003e laanwj at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Like in any open source project there is lots of decision making ability\n\u003e\u003e for code changes. I'd say look at the changelog for e.g. 0.11\n\u003e\u003e https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.11/doc/release-notes.md#0110-change-log,\n\u003e\u003e or follow pull requests for a while, to see how many decisions about\n\u003e\u003e changes are made from day to day. No, I'm not sitting on my hands, and so\n\u003e\u003e is none of the other contributors that you'd like to get rid of.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e The analogy goes further even. Even though I disagree with some of the\n\u003e changes you're making, I respect Mike's (and anyone's) right to make a fork\n\u003e of Bitcoin Core. That's how open source works: if people disagree with\n\u003e changes made or not made, they can maintain their own version. However:\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Consensus changes are *much* more difficult, on the other hand. Even\n\u003e\u003e relatively straightforward softforks come with a long discussion process\n\u003e\u003e (see BIP62, BIP66). A hardfork is hard to do at the best of times (everyone\n\u003e\u003e needs to upgrade their software!), and simply not possible if almost the\n\u003e\u003e entire technical community disagrees with you.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Consensus changes - in particular hardforks - are not about making a\n\u003e change to the software. You are effectively asking users of the system to\n\u003e migrate to a new system. Perhaps one which is a philosophical successor to\n\u003e the old one, but a different system, with new rules that are incompatible\n\u003e with the old one.\n\u003e\n\nIndeed. I think Mike is glossing over this major facet.\n\nConsensus changes - worded another way - change Bitcoin's Constitution -\nThe Rules that everyone in the system is -forced- to follow, or be ignored\nby the system.\n\nChanging bitcoin's rules IS IN NO WAY like Wikipedia or other open source\nsoftware.\n\n-- \nJeff Garzik\nBitcoin core developer and open source evangelist\nBitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150618/4eec5ab0/attachment.html\u003e", "sig": "ddfe5564a8bc86d0d13380e9d3d1447ba057252829859baf8da25b13f6ab71b4c1a02a8dc012d13c44f2de808b12771f6bc58776baf0a694d58cef2aa19c265d" }