<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Jeff Garzik <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jgarzik@exmulti.com">jgarzik@exmulti.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Pieter Wuille <<a href="mailto:pieter.wuille@gmail.com">pieter.wuille@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Any opinions about a numbering scheme? Currently the value 60000 is used. We could<br>
> simply start increasing the number one by one now for every change, or we could<br>
> do a "cleanup" to 100000 first, and start incrementing from there.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>It would be nice to have 100000 as the baseline, "frozen" protocol.<br></blockquote><div><br>Yes, I think increasing with one is enough for now. Let's not get ahead of ourselves :)<br><br>Wladimir<br>
<br></div></div>