--- Log opened Sat Jul 18 00:00:27 2020
00:16 < luke-jr> lockinontimeout should not be controverisal
01:24 < cato_> luke-jr: if there's rough consensus before signaling, then it shouldn't, I agree
01:27 < cato_> I guess my personal preference for a short bip8(false) period stems from my believing that this approach includes an explicit discussion period, which would be announced before signaling starts.
01:41 < cato_> whereas bip8(true) right away would ex post declar the discussion period to have been in the past (e.g., during taproot review), which, while not untrue, is not that explicit and might be used by some to sow dissent
01:45 < cato_> honestly, I think there's merit to separating review from discussion, for some people might say 'why should I discuss something before it's finalized'
02:08 -!- kristapsk_ [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
02:25 -!- zmnscpxj__ [~zmnscpxj@gateway/tor-sasl/zmnscpxj] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
02:26 < luke-jr> cato_: if there isn't rough consensus, then no activation should be deployed at all
02:28 < luke-jr> s/rough consensus/sufficient support/
02:28 < luke-jr> but point is, it's the same metric
02:37 -!- zmnscpxj__ [~zmnscpxj@gateway/tor-sasl/zmnscpxj] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:01 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:05 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:06 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
03:53 -!- reallll [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:55 -!- reallll is now known as belcher
03:56 -!- belcher_ [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
05:45 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined ##taproot-activation
05:47 -!- molz_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has joined ##taproot-activation
05:50 -!- mol_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
08:50 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has quit [Quit: jonatack]
08:55 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:55 -!- brg444 [uid207215@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-tpticpxkjqtcgvli] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:13 -!- mol [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:17 -!- molz_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
09:42 < jeremyrubin> also if that were the plan what you'd want is bip8 false (long period) with a plan to do bip8 true after 3 months if not activated, so that if bip8 false clients don't upgrade they can still be signalled compatibly with the overlapping BIP8 true.
10:40 < luke-jr> true
10:51 -!- Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW
13:22 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
13:24 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:00 -!- benthecarman_ [~benthecar@2600:1700:bb80:db0:c81d:e42e:8370:f5c] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:05 -!- benthecarman__ [~benthecar@2600:1700:bb80:db0:c81d:e42e:8370:f5c] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:09 -!- benthecarman_ [~benthecar@2600:1700:bb80:db0:c81d:e42e:8370:f5c] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
14:14 -!- benthecarman_ [~benthecar@2600:1700:bb80:db0:c81d:e42e:8370:f5c] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:18 -!- benthecarman_ [~benthecar@2600:1700:bb80:db0:c81d:e42e:8370:f5c] has quit [Client Quit]
14:19 -!- benthecarman__ [~benthecar@2600:1700:bb80:db0:c81d:e42e:8370:f5c] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:03 < roconnor> Indeed, bip8(false) 24m or longer is probably better than BIP8(false) 3m.  With bip8(false) 3months, all those clients updates can no longer support taproot enforcement after 3 months, so they all end up wasted in a sense.
15:05 < roconnor> hey, I feel like we are widdling down the activation method candidates. :D
15:08 < roconnor> it seems if we are going to do bip8(false) at all, then it should be a long time period no matter what.  If, for whatever reason, we choose to abort activation, then is not much harm in leaving the version bit in limbo for even as long as 4 years.  We probably aren't going to reuse the bit within the next 4 years anyways.
15:09 < roconnor> (I still think bip8(true) is better, just saying that if we go for bip8(false) there is no harm it having it go for a long time, and a lot of benefit.)
15:10 < roconnor> I also think that doing bip8(false) (for a long time) is better than debating bip8(true) for 3 months. :)
15:42 -!- zmnscpxj__ [~zmnscpxj@gateway/tor-sasl/zmnscpxj] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:17 -!- grubles [~blockhash@unaffiliated/grubles] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
17:17 -!- grubles [~blockhash@155.138.192.175] has joined ##taproot-activation
17:17 -!- grubles is now known as Guest21987
17:24 -!- Guest21987 [~blockhash@155.138.192.175] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.7.1]
18:00 < jeremyrubin> roconnor: I think doing bip8(false) without a bip8(true) planned (and communicated as planned) shortly thereafter risks breaking consensus if it's a uasf style deal again. But I'm OK with it if the default plan is to do a release accelerating it
18:01 < jeremyrubin> I think that putting the community in the position to have to negotiate and coordinate a UASF type thing is probably bad
18:06 -!- lukedashjr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined ##taproot-activation
18:07 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
18:11 -!- lukedashjr is now known as luke-jr
18:22 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
18:26 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined ##taproot-activation
18:35 -!- brg444 [uid207215@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-tpticpxkjqtcgvli] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
20:43 -!- zmnscpxj__ [~zmnscpxj@gateway/tor-sasl/zmnscpxj] has joined ##taproot-activation
21:22 < aj> jeremyrubin: if it's not the community negotiating and coordinating it, it's not a UASF -- that's just a definition thing
22:25 -!- rdymac [uid31665@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-twrdgyebajyhkrey] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
22:33 < zmnscpxj__> quick question: how likely is it that the taproot activation will include `SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT`?
--- Log closed Sun Jul 19 00:00:26 2020