From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin•net>
To: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:10:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAUq486EXSJ1ri-3nWMt9vWhoajLp+LkWTV_-ZvU_FE+qfqcpA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1473 bytes --]
> Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They
just count up, every half year.
OK, but then it's not semantic versioning (as btcdrak claims).
> Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature
enough to be called 1.0.0'
I think the question has already been answered for you by the companies
that build on top of it, the investments being made and the $3.5 billion
market cap. The 1.0.0 tag is probably long overdue.
Then you could start using the version as a signaling mechanism.
> We're horribly stressed-out as is.
Yeah, probably not a very important topic right now.
2015-10-01 11:56 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail•com>:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:
> > I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
>
> I'll interpret the question as "why is the Bitcoin Core software still
> <1.0.0". Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the block/transaction
> versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest network protocol
> version is 70011.
>
> Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They
> just count up, every half year.
>
> Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature
> enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all of
> which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing a
> number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.
>
> Wladimir
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2759 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-01 10:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-24 11:25 [bitcoin-dev] " Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-09-29 21:22 ` Jeff Garzik
2015-09-30 17:57 ` Luke Dashjr
2015-09-30 18:10 ` Jorge Timón
2015-09-30 19:24 ` Jeff Garzik
2015-10-01 8:50 ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-10-01 9:05 ` Marcel Jamin
2015-10-01 9:17 ` Btc Drak
[not found] ` <CAAUq484+g89yD+s7iR_mGWPM3TTN7V6-EPb1ig=P1BKfcbztPg@mail.gmail.com>
2015-10-01 9:41 ` [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: " Marcel Jamin
2015-10-01 9:56 ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-10-01 10:10 ` Marcel Jamin [this message]
2015-10-01 10:15 ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-10-01 10:34 ` Marcel Jamin
2015-10-01 10:50 ` Jeff Garzik
2015-10-01 20:20 ` Luke Dashjr
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=CAAUq486EXSJ1ri-3nWMt9vWhoajLp+LkWTV_-ZvU_FE+qfqcpA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=marcel@jamin$(echo .)net \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=laanwj@gmail$(echo .)com \
/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