From: Michael Folkson <michaelfolkson@gmail•com>
To: achow101-lists@achow101•com
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Taproot activation proposal "Speedy Trial"
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 14:06:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFvNmHRbH3oRFdvbCHGSaB2zmL2dvo-n71dKK8=Qs7Qa6SGVXg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
> I don't think we should have a followup deployment start so close to to
timeout of ST. I think it would be better to schedule the followup
around ST, especially since the details around that are fuzzier and
dependent on the results of ST itself.
Until Core pull request(s) are merged I don't think we can finalize
startheight (and hence the timeout) for Speedy Trial either.
Speedy Trial seems to have the most community consensus of any
activation proposal thus far and I'm confident it will at some point
in the near future it will be merged into Core.
Community feedback:
https://gist.github.com/michaelfolkson/92899f27f1ab30aa2ebee82314f8fe7f
Therefore I think the onus is on any UASF release to fit around a
Speedy Trial deployment in Core. I haven't thought enough about what
my preference would be assuming activation fails with Speedy Trial re
a follow up deployment in Core and/or a UASF release. However, I would
be 100 percent opposed to any UASF release that conflicts or is not
compatible with a Speedy Trial deployment in Core.
On 3/14/21 10:51 PM, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> The last period before timeoutheight here overlaps with the current BIP8(True)
> deployment plan. So if this period specifically were to reach 90% signalling,
> nodes would activate Taproot at height 697536, but ST-only nodes would still
> wait until 709632 instead.
>
> Probably the best solution is to just move this ST window 1 period earlier?
>
> Luke
--
Michael Folkson
Email: michaelfolkson@gmail•com
Keybase: michaelfolkson
PGP: 43ED C999 9F85 1D40 EAF4 9835 92D6 0159 214C FEE3
next reply other threads:[~2021-03-15 14:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-15 14:06 Michael Folkson [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-03-06 19:56 Michael Folkson
2021-03-06 21:55 ` Matt Corallo
2021-03-06 3:43 David A. Harding
2021-03-06 4:44 ` Jeremy
2021-03-06 6:04 ` Andrew Chow
2021-03-06 14:44 ` Russell O'Connor
2021-03-15 2:51 ` Luke Dashjr
2021-03-15 3:14 ` Andrew Chow
2021-03-06 9:29 ` Anthony Towns
2021-03-06 10:26 ` Eric Voskuil
2021-03-06 18:11 ` Matt Corallo
2021-03-06 20:23 ` David A. Harding
2021-03-06 21:48 ` Matt Corallo
2021-03-06 20:44 ` Ariel Luaces
2021-03-06 20:55 ` Keagan McClelland
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='CAFvNmHRbH3oRFdvbCHGSaB2zmL2dvo-n71dKK8=Qs7Qa6SGVXg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=michaelfolkson@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=achow101-lists@achow101$(echo .)com \
--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