[Bitcoin-development] Random order for clients page

Alan Reiner etotheipi at gmail.com
Mon Jul 9 18:03:55 UTC 2012

I generally agree with Greg.   I don't see anything he's said or done as

As an alt-client developer, I'm happy to see my client on the main page,
but I'm also happy if that "clients" page is simply an acknowledgement that
there's more to the Bitcoin world than just the Bitcoin-Qt client, and a
link of where to find more information (i.e. the wiki).  I would still *
prefer* to have the page the way it is, because I think alt clients should
be more accessible and word will spread better where it is now -- but I
also recognize the inherent difficulty of gaining any kind of consensus of
how it should be organized, what goes on the list, etc, and no matter how
you do it, someone will complain about it being unfair or not right.

We either have to have a "czar" who is trusted to make responsible
decisions, and complaints of being unfair or recommendations for
improvements can go through that person, but ultimately it is that person
who makes the call.  Or we just move it to another page that is less
strictly controlled and where these things matter less.  Trying to gain
consensus among an amalgamation of developers all with competing priorities
and "products" is a terrible way to try to agree on stuff.


On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Amir Taaki <zgenjix at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > JS randomisation is bad. People shouldn't need JS to view a webpage.
> JS randomization doesn't imply needing JS to view the page. It implies
> needing JS to see it in random order.  You could also combine it with
> the server-side randomization if you care about non-js being non
> random, though I don't think it matters.
> As others have pointed out I don't generally think the randomization
> is good in principle, but if its done it should at least achieve its
> goals.
> > Only you have a problem with this page. I don't see why Bitcoin-Qt needs
> to be first either when it dominates the front page. It is perfectly fine
> as it is.
> I'll let other people speak for themselves, but I did consult others
> before reverting your last batch of changes.
> More generally, we have pull requests in order to get some peer review
> of changes.  Everyone should use them except for changes which are
> urgent or trivially safe.  (Presumably everyone with access knows how
> to tell if their changes are likely to be risky or controversial)
> > You are not a developer of any alternative clients, and this is a
> webpage for Bitcoin clients. I have made a change to remove a source of
> disputes, and make the process more fair and equal. Your suggestion to
> remove the clients page is your bias towards thinking that there should be
> only one Bitcoin client that everyone uses (the one which you contribute
> towards).
> I'm strongly supportive diversity in the Bitcoin network, and some alt
> client developers can speak to the positive prodding I've given them
> towards becoming more complete software. If I've said anything that
> suggests otherwise I'd love to be pointed to it in order to clarify my
> position.
> Unfortunately none of the primary alternatives are yet complete, the
> network would be non-function if it consisted entirely of multibit or
> electrum nodes (and as you've noted armory uses a local reference
> client as its 'server').  The distinction between multiple kinds of
> clients in terms of security and network health are subtle and can be
> difficult to explain even to technical users and so until something
> changes there the reference client needs to be the option we lead
> with. People should us it unless their use-case doesn't match. When it
> does they'll know it and they'll be looking. We don't need to make one
> of those recommendations a primary option.
> I like the proposals of moving this stuff to the Wiki as the wiki
> already contains tons of questionable (and sometimes contradictory)
> advice and so there is less expectation that placement there implies
> any vetting.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20120709/664e705e/attachment.html>

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list