Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 2 promotion to Final - Mustafa Al-Bassam

From: Mustafa Al-Bassam <mus@musalbas•com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 2 promotion to Final
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 00:36:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E0C197.7040708@musalbas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201603081904.28687.luke@dashjr.org>

> the soft-fork does not become Final for as long as such a hard-fork
has potentially-majority support, or at most three months.
This wording is awkward. What is "potentially-majority"?

>A hard-fork BIP requires adoption from the entire Bitcoin economy,
particularly including those selling desirable goods and services in
exchange for bitcoin payments, as well as Bitcoin holders who wish to
spend or would spend their bitcoins (including selling for other
currencies) differently in the event of such a hard-fork.
What if one shop owner, for example, out of thousands, doesn't adapt the
hard-fork? It is expected, and should perhaps be encouraged, for a small
minority to not accept a hard fork, but by the wording of the BIP
("entire Bitcoin economy"), one shop owner can veto a hard-fork.

Mustafa

On 08/03/16 19:04, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> It has been about 1 month since BIP 2 finished receiving comments, so I 
> believe it is an appropriate time to begin the process of moving it to Final 
> Status. Toward this end, I have opened a pull request:
>
>     https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/350
>
> The current requirement for this is that "the reference implementation is 
> complete and accepted by the community". Given the vagueness of this criteria, 
> I intend to move forward applying BIP 2's more specific criteria to itself:
>
>> A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it achieves rough
>> consensus on the mailing list. Such a proposal is said to have rough
>> consensus if it has been open to discussion on the development mailing list
>> for at least one month, and no person maintains any unaddressed
>> substantiated objections to it. Addressed or obstructive objections may be
>> ignored/overruled by general agreement that they have been sufficiently
>> addressed, but clear reasoning must be given in such circumstances.
> Furthermore, there is a reference implementation in the mentioned PR.
>
> Please review the latest draft BIP and provide any objections ASAP.
> If there are no outstanding objections on 2016 April 9th, I will consider the 
> current draft to have reached rough consensus and update its Status to Final 
> by merging the PR.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev