[Bitcoin-development] improving development model (Re: Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers
tomh at thinlink.com
Sat Jun 20 02:59:25 UTC 2015
On 6/19/2015 6:43 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> No surprise, the position of Blockstream employees is that hard forks
> must never happen and that everyone's ordinary transactions should go
> via some new network that doesn't yet exist.
If my company were working on spiffy new ideas that required a hard fork
to implement, I'd be rather dismayed to see the blocksize hard fork
happen *before those ideas were ready*.
Because then I'd eventually have to convince people that those ideas
were worth a hard fork all on their own. It would be much easier to
convince people to roll them in with the already necessary blocksize
hard fork, if that event could be delayed.
As far as I know, Blockstream representatives have never said that
waiting for other changes to be ready is a reason to delay the blocksize
hard fork. So if this were the real reason, it would suggest they have
been hiding their true motives for making such a fuss about the
I've got no evidence at all to support thoughts like this... just the
paranoid mindset that seems to infect a person who gets involved in
bitcoin. But the question is every bit as valid as Adam's query into
More information about the bitcoin-dev