[Bitcoin-segwit2x] September/October SegWit2x Status Update

Jeff Garzik jeff at bloq.com
Wed Oct 25 20:00:25 UTC 2017 

Alex,

No; the Fedora model exists and works precisely because it risk adjusts
against all manner of upstream events:  Project idleness, Developer
departure, developer grumpiness with some changes otherwise widely accepted
by the community, and more.

You can read more background at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedora_Project



On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Alex Morcos <morcos at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes but you're assuming the continued existence of the Bitcoin Core
> project, but in the hypothetical situation where Segwit2X is the completely
> dominant chain, there is no continued existence of the Bitcoin Core project.
> There is no upstream in this scenario.
>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff at bloq.com> wrote:
>
>> Alex,
>>
>> The plan was already stated in the thread.  This is a well defined open
>> source pattern and situation.  btc1 will continue as a sort of Fedora for
>> Bitcoin after the fork.
>>
>> It is irrelevant whether or not Bitcoin Core merges patches such as the
>> 2X patches.  The codebase remains 99% the same either way.
>>
>> That is what Fedora does on Linux:   Carry patches that haven't made
>> their way upstream.   Either the upstream developers merge or they don't;
>> either way, the project continues.
>>
>> Consider reviewing another example from open source history, the GCC vs.
>> EGCS situation.  https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/History#EGCS
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Alex Morcos <morcos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Jeff, I'd just like to clarify what you envision for btc1 after the fork.
>>>
>>> Let's assume 1X wins: OK, makes sense to me, additional implementation
>>> with extra features.
>>>
>>> Let's assume 2X wins: There is no Bitcoin Core working on "Bitcoin".
>>> Bitcoin Core will either work on the minority chain (with different rules!)
>>> for as long as that seems like it has a chance to be the Bitcoin again OR
>>> it will just cease to exist.  The model of continuing to base development
>>> off of the work of Bitcoin Core contributors when Bitcoin is clearly
>>> defined by the 2X rules just doesn't make sense.  There will be no Bitcoin
>>> Core contributors working on the 2X rules (or very few).  I'm not someone
>>> who thinks that the contributors to the Bitcoin Core project are the only
>>> ones who can do this, but I think you should have some plan for who is
>>> going to work on it.  It won't be btc1 and Bitcoin Core, it'll just be btc1
>>> after the fork (I don't know and maybe Classic/Unlimited?)
>>>
>>> NB: I think this has very low probability, but it's kind of crazy to me
>>> that you don't even have a plan for what to do if you succeed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Jeff Garzik via Bitcoin-segwit2x <
>>> bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Chris,
>>>>
>>>> There is no reallocation of time or commitment.   Metronome and Bloq
>>>> are off-topic on this list, so I'll only cover this once.
>>>>
>>>> I run a company, Bloq, with over 25 team members -- not just one.  Just
>>>> like many other companies, we have multiple projects running
>>>> simultaneously, and Metronome is one of those.  Our primary product is
>>>> BloqEnterprise, which is a supported-Bitcoin product in the style of Red
>>>> Hat Enterprise Linux.  Majority of Bloq revenue comes from Bitcoin.  If you
>>>> are a large enterprise that needs Bitcoin support (or a very well funded
>>>> startup), we would be happy to discuss a customer agreement.
>>>> BloqEnterprise v1 is Bitcoin-only; BloqEnterprise v2 will be adding other
>>>> chains to our product, such as Litecoin or Bitcoin Cash, as well as Eth/Etc
>>>> support, based on customer demand.
>>>>
>>>> Our vision at Bloq has always been:  Multi-chain, multi-token,
>>>> multi-network, with Bitcoin - BTC - as the root of a security tree.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As for btc1:   As was stated in August, months ago, the code is in
>>>> feature freeze until after the fork.  It is a software engineering goal to
>>>> keep changes to an absolute minimum, and that is what btc1 is doing.
>>>>
>>>> After the fork, btc1 will be continuing as a sort of "Fedora for
>>>> Bitcoin" -- very exciting stuff, and a useful way to risk adjust versus
>>>> Bitcoin Core instability or feature selection.   Several btc1 members have
>>>> proposed new btc1 changes for post-fork, large and small.  It will be a
>>>> very nice addition to the Bitcoin community to have an additional outlet
>>>> for feature requests such as this one, a small change that makes life
>>>> easier for DevOps: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/issues/107
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Chris Stewart <chris at suredbits.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Has there been any thought to who will be maintaining B2X after the
>>>>> chain split is completed? It seems the only dev, Jeff, has committed his
>>>>> time to a new project called Metronome
>>>>> <https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/metronome-segwit2x-developer-jeff-garzik-is-also-building-an-altcoin/>.
>>>>> It doesn't appear that any significant portion of the bitcoin core
>>>>> developers are willing to put their time and effort into this project.
>>>>>
>>>>> So is the plan to just fork and abandon the btc1 codebase?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Chris
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Melvin Carvalho via Bitcoin-segwit2x
>>>>> <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 25 October 2017 at 19:54, Jeff Garzik via Bitcoin-segwit2x <
>>>>>> bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a follow-on from the previous status update in August:
>>>>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-
>>>>>>> segwit2x/2017-August/000265.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. To state the obvious, everything is still full steam ahead for
>>>>>>> segwit2x upgrade in mid-November.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. As noted in August, the project continues to be in a code freeze
>>>>>>> for the fork:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
>>>>>>> /Freeze_(software_engineering)   Only changes or fixes thought to
>>>>>>> be important pre-fork will be included.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. Reviewing the btc1 project and branch policies, btc1 is a source
>>>>>>> code fork of Bitcoin Core, very much like Fedora Linux is a
>>>>>>> fork/distribution intended for end users.  As such, we track Bitcoin Core
>>>>>>> updates as necessary and pull those into the project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4. "segwit2x" is the production release branch for the SegWit2x
>>>>>>> Working Group, and the latest release can be downloaded here:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/releases/tag/v1.14.5
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 5. "segwit2x-dev" is the development and testing release branch.
>>>>>>> New changes go to segwit2x-dev first, for external testing and feedback,
>>>>>>> before being merged into the production branch, and labelled a production
>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6. The current segwit2x production release, on the segwit2x branch,
>>>>>>> is based on Bitcoin Core 0.14.x.   The current dev release is based on
>>>>>>> Bitcoin Core 0.15.x.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 7. I've been paying close attention to the Bitcoin Core 0.15.x
>>>>>>> rollout.    Based on instability and bugs that upstream Bitcoin Core
>>>>>>> project is seeing - ie. Core's bugs not ours - segwit2x will stay on
>>>>>>> Bitcoin Core 0.14.x through the November fork.  This is the most stable
>>>>>>> path for users, based on upstream Bitcoin Core instability.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In short we -do not- feel that Bitcoin Core bugs and instability
>>>>>>> will impact our project in the short term, because this is not yet in a
>>>>>>> segwit2x production release on a production branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 8. The only change worth noting is a likely be an adjustment of
>>>>>>> miner policy defaults that will be accepted through the code freeze:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/pull/136
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks everyone!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the update.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There was a question on a previous thread that I think went
>>>>>> unanswered.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is the threshold for release still 80% miner signaling?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If miner signaling for NYA falls significantly, would it be
>>>>>> considered new information?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FYI: latest metric is NYA signaling at 75% in the last 24h [1], with
>>>>>> the position of ViaBTC still unclear
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] https://coin.dance/blocks
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jeff Garzik
>>>>>>> CEO and Co Founder
>>>>>>> Bloq, Inc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>>>>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>>>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jeff Garzik
>>>> CEO and Co Founder
>>>> Bloq, Inc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Garzik
>> CEO and Co Founder
>> Bloq, Inc.
>>
>>
>


-- 
Jeff Garzik
CEO and Co Founder
Bloq, Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-segwit2x/attachments/20171025/27991671/attachment.html>

More information about the Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list