public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail•ch>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Start time for BIP141 (segwit)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:20:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2034434.4WpKWoeOrB@strawberry> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2d5abad7-cd9d-4396-4dd2-c687a1a808dc@vt.edu>

On Sunday, 16 October 2016 09:47:40 CEST Douglas Roark via bitcoin-dev 
wrote:
> Would I want anyone to lose money due to faulty wallets? Of course not.
> By the same token, devs have had almost a year to tinker with SegWit and
> make sure the wallet isn't so poorly written that it'll flame out when
> SegWit comes along. It's not like this is some untested, mostly unknown
> feature that's being slipped out at the last minute

There have been objections to the way that SegWit has been implemented for a 
long time, some wallets are taking a "wait and see" approach.  If you look 
at the page you linked[1], that is a very very sad state of affairs. The 
vast majority is not ready.  Would be interesting to get a more up-to-date 
view.
Wallets probably won't want to invest resources adding support for a feature 
that will never be activated. The fact that we have a much safer alternative 
in the form of Flexible Transactions may mean it will not get activated. We 
won't know until its actually locked in.
Wallets may not act until its actually locked in either. And I think we 
should respect that.

Even if all wallets support it (and thats a big if), they need to be rolled 
out and people need to actually download those updates.
This takes time, 2 months after the lock-in of SegWit would be the minimum 
safe time for people to actually upgrade.

1) https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/
-- 
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel


  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-16 18:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-16 14:31 Pieter Wuille
2016-10-16 14:58 ` Tom Zander
2016-10-16 16:35   ` Gavin Andresen
2016-10-16 16:42     ` Tom Zander
2016-10-16 16:57       ` Johnson Lau
2016-10-16 17:04       ` [bitcoin-dev] On the security of soft forks Matt Corallo
2016-10-16 16:42     ` [bitcoin-dev] Start time for BIP141 (segwit) Eric Voskuil
2016-10-16 16:47     ` Douglas Roark
2016-10-16 18:20       ` Tom Zander [this message]
2016-10-16 18:41         ` Jorge Timón
2016-10-16 18:54           ` Tom Zander
2016-10-16 19:11             ` Johnson Lau
2016-10-16 20:08               ` Tom Zander
2016-10-17  3:46                 ` Johnson Lau
2016-10-16 19:35         ` [bitcoin-dev] (no subject) Matt Corallo
2016-10-16 20:45           ` Tom Zander
2016-10-17 13:13             ` Btc Drak
2016-10-16 19:49         ` [bitcoin-dev] Start time for BIP141 (segwit) Douglas Roark
2016-10-16 20:58           ` Tom Zander
2016-10-16 21:03             ` gb
2016-10-16 21:08             ` Marek Palatinus
2016-10-16 21:19             ` Andrew C
2016-10-17 11:17               ` Tom Zander
2016-10-17 13:09                 ` Peter Todd
2016-10-17 13:19                 ` Andrew C
2016-10-17 13:27                   ` Btc Drak
2016-10-17 13:31                 ` Jorge Timón
2016-10-16 20:14         ` Btc Drak
2016-10-16 16:08 ` Chris Belcher
2016-10-16 17:52 ` Matt Corallo
2016-10-16 21:49 ` Peter Todd

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2034434.4WpKWoeOrB@strawberry \
    --to=tomz@freedommail$(echo .)ch \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox