[bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin is an experiment. Why don't we have an experimental hardfork?

Jorge Timón jtimon at jtimon.cc
Wed Aug 19 09:29:48 UTC 2015

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:06 PM, Danny Thorpe via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Ya, so?  All that means is that the experiment might reach the hard fork tipping point faster than mainnet would. Verifying that the network can handle such transitions, and how larger blocks affect the network, is the point of testing.
> And when I refer to testnet, I mean the public global testnet blockchain, not in-house isolated networks like testnet-in-a-box.

I would expect any uncontroversial hardfork to be deployed in testnet3
before it is deployed in bitcoin's main chain.

In any case, you can already do these tests using
Note that even if the new testchains are regtest-like (ie cheap proof
of work) you don't need to test them "in-a-box": you can run them from
many different places.
Rusty's test ( http://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=509 ) could have been
perfectly made using #6382, it just didn't existed at the time.

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list