[bitcoin-dev] BIP Process and Votes

Jorge Timón jtimon at jtimon.cc
Fri Jun 26 11:13:17 UTC 2015


On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Milly Bitcoin <milly at bitcoins.info> wrote:
> "Cultish" means making claims without any supporting facts.

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 5:19 AM, Milly Bitcoin <milly at bitcoins.info> wrote:
> As for developers, the consensus on code changes are almost never 100% and
> someone has to make the decision about what is an a acceptable consensus.

This statement seems "cultish" by your own definition.
I'm going to make the opposite statement:  the consensus on code
changes is almost always 100%.
Mark has already given a couple examples of changes to consensus rules
(the most risky type of change), here's a few thousand other examples
of changes to the bitcoin core's code that had no opposition:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master

Can you please point us to a few examples were changes were made with
opposition to them?
In those cases (which you assure is what happens almost always), would
you say that the result of letting a decider decide instead of fixing
or addressing all the concerns (either by changing the proposed code
or explaining it) better in restrospective?


More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list