From: Andrew Poelstra <apoelstra@wpsoftware•net>
To: Casey Rodarmor <casey@rodarmor•com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ordinals BIP PR
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 13:45:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZTZ5CGtBB9+zFbtY@camus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANLPe+OQBsPiTrLEfz=SMxU8TkM_1XNfJQeq8gt2V6vDu=+Zxw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1370 bytes --]
On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 10:38:01PM -0700, Casey Rodarmor via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> There has been much misunderstanding of the nature of the BIP process.
> BIPS, in particular informational BIPs, are a form of technical
> documentation, and their acceptance does not indicate that they will be
> included in any implementation, including Bitcoin Core, nor that they they
> have consensus among the community.
>
> Preexisting BIPs include hard-fork block size increases, hard-fork
> proof-of-work changes, colored coin voting protocols, rejected soft fork
> proposals, encouragement of address reuse, and drivechain.
>
> <snip>
>
I agree and I think it sets a bad precedent to be evaluating BIPs based
on the merits of their implementation (vs their specification) or their
consequences for the network. Actual consensus is much bigger than the
BIPs repo, so this accomplishes little beyond making the BIPs repo itself
hard to interact with.
In the worst case it may cause people to interpret BIP numbers as
indicating that proposals are "blessed" by some particular influential
set of people, which can only cause problems.
--
Andrew Poelstra
Director of Research, Blockstream
Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web: https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
The sun is always shining in space
-Justin Lewis-Webster
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-23 13:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-21 5:38 Casey Rodarmor
2023-10-23 13:45 ` Andrew Poelstra [this message]
2023-10-23 15:35 ` Peter Todd
2023-10-23 16:32 ` Tim Ruffing
2023-10-26 22:05 ` Peter Todd
2023-10-23 17:43 ` Andrew Poelstra
2023-10-23 18:29 ` Luke Dashjr
2023-10-24 1:28 ` alicexbt
2023-10-24 22:56 ` Olaoluwa Osuntokun
2023-10-24 23:08 ` Christopher Allen
2023-10-25 0:15 ` Luke Dashjr
2023-10-26 22:11 ` Peter Todd
2023-10-27 9:39 ` Alexander F. Moser
2023-10-27 17:05 ` alicexbt
2023-11-09 2:15 ` Casey Rodarmor
2023-11-09 22:32 ` Claus Ehrenberg
2023-10-23 14:57 Léo Haf
2023-10-23 17:26 ` Ryan Breen
2023-11-20 22:20 vjudeu
2023-11-21 12:13 ` Kostas Karasavvas
2023-11-21 23:10 vjudeu
2023-11-22 11:27 ` Kostas Karasavvas
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=ZTZ5CGtBB9+zFbtY@camus \
--to=apoelstra@wpsoftware$(echo .)net \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=casey@rodarmor$(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