Because Bitcoin XT is 1.0.0
;-)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marcel Jamin <mar...@jamin.net>
Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
To: Btc Drak <btcd...@gmail.com>
I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.
—
Regards,
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:57 PM, null
<bitcoin-dev-requ...@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Send bitcoin-dev mailing list submissions to
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> bitcoin-dev-requ...@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> bitcoin-dev-ow...@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of bitcoin-dev digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. Re: Design Competition (odinn)
> 2. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
> 3. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
> 4. Re: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Btc Drak)
> 5. Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule (Marcel Jamin)
> 6. Re: Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:38:50 +0000
> From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerri...@riseup.net>
> To: Richard Olsen <richard.ol...@lykkex.com>, bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design Competition
> Message-ID: <560cb8da.6060...@riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> Grosses me out that you have enforced KYC as part of what you are
> doing for anyone who would decide to get involved:
> https://wiki.lykkex.com/?id=start#lykke_citizens
> Good luck with that, I'm sure not going to be a part of it, and I
> recommend that no-one else does either.
> - - O
> Richard Olsen via bitcoin-dev:
>> All,
>>
>> We are looking for participants in a Bitcoin related competition:
>> the aim is to build a trading platform (initially for foreign
>> exchange, other assets will follow) which lets participants settle
>> their trades through the blockchain via coloured coins. To
>> facilitate a quicker trade reconciliation, the use of a sidechain
>> is a suggestion but by no means a requirement. There will be an
>> online briefing event today where we will outline the requirements
>> in more detail, though much of it we have posted on our website
>> www.lykkex.com .
>>
>> As we want this to be a community driven effort rather than
>> something turning into a proprietary technology, all contributions
>> will be made available under a MIT license on Github.
>>
>> I look forward to answering your questions at the online briefing
>> event or over email,
>>
>> Thank you and kind regards, Richard Olsen
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing
>> list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
> - --
> http://abis.io ~
> "a protocol concept to enable decentralization
> and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
> https://keybase.io/odinn
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDLjaAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkQAH/i6603ivtZXjNw5ZlH1W2p7z
> c88sb5CcTuTUi+zEx6Q0MRUFfdYcrcBrGsua3CKU9226rpL4acD2Bby5kUPZ1h2/
> Rl5EiZa11oeqZaZaO5ZmXZ33BOaO2gxqqYEF1zBOzDgky6cqRrj8t4VAj5CKsxsP
> ktM98UqVXdcuOfBP7y/xqX1Yw9e55PpwUCtaazLo8UkPLMrtdzrbKVZBtjqGxMnG
> ZxmYku8g6xdmZAMz9xn9oVGtuMHrEjhIVycz3FMHBjoZNLE9yK4YeWyEvLI4YPFt
> KBR7HvGDava3dzMM5ugw3hgFShfegjrIunWQ/vC9RCjBMLVGVX5RgEblgQe29eY=
> =41DC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> ------------------------------
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:50:59 +0200
> From: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laa...@gmail.com>
> To: Luke Dashjr <l...@dashjr.org>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID: <20151001085058.ga10...@amethyst.visucore.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan via
>> bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> > 2015-12-01
>> > -----------
>> > - Feature freeze
>>
>> Where is "Consensus freeze"? Shouldn't this be put off until after the HK
>> workshop in case a hardfork is decided on? Or have we de-coupled it from the
>> release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for it
>> too)?
> In principle, "feature freeze" means that any large code changes will no
> longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.
> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK workshop I'm
> sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code makes it
> into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to decouple consensus
> changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
> We've seen lot of release date drift due to "this and this change needs to
> make it in" in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a time-based
> instead of feature-based release schedule.
> We can always do a 0.12.1.
> Wladimir
> ------------------------------
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:59 +0200
> From: Marcel Jamin <mar...@jamin.net>
> To: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laa...@gmail.com>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> <CAAUq486=tisnp0mbfjwydcsyvx-qx5dv_kkzunr7jp63knw...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?
> 2015-10-01 10:50 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
>> > On Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:25:56 AM Wladimir J. van der Laan via
>> > bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> > > 2015-12-01
>> > > -----------
>> > > - Feature freeze
>> >
>> > Where is "Consensus freeze"? Shouldn't this be put off until after the HK
>> > workshop in case a hardfork is decided on? Or have we de-coupled it from
>> the
>> > release process entirely anyway (since old versions need an update for it
>> > too)?
>>
>> In principle, "feature freeze" means that any large code changes will no
>> longer go into 0.12, unless fixing critical bugs.
>>
>> I'm not keen on postponing 0.12 for such reasons - after the HK workshop
>> I'm sure that it will take some development/testing/review before code
>> makes it into anything. Apart from that there's a good point to decouple
>> consensus changes from Bitcoin Core major releases.
>>
>> We've seen lot of release date drift due to "this and this change needs to
>> make it in" in the past, that was a major reason to switch to a time-based
>> instead of feature-based release schedule.
>>
>> We can always do a 0.12.1.
>>
>> Wladimir
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/5dca9e61/attachment-0001.html>
> ------------------------------
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:17:52 +0100
> From: Btc Drak <btcd...@gmail.com>
> To: Marcel Jamin <mar...@jamin.net>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> <CADJgMzuDPoQacdrH7n_ajwuYLMZ4-Z19KZSa=w=rlhmokjh...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?
>>
> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance releases
> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/dc91562f/attachment-0001.html>
> ------------------------------
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200
> From: Marcel Jamin <mar...@jamin.net>
> To: Btc Drak <btcd...@gmail.com>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID:
> <caauq4861wd2c42gvy7sow9414r8rgy+yzp7rdtzagrwqewn...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Marcel Jamin <mar...@jamin.net>
> Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> To: Btc Drak <btcd...@gmail.com>
> I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
> I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.
> 2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak <btcd...@gmail.com>:
>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?
>>>
>>
>> We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance releases
>> are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example.
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/17164b7e/attachment-0001.html>
> ------------------------------
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:56:55 +0200
> From: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laa...@gmail.com>
> To: Marcel Jamin <mar...@jamin.net>
> Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
> Message-ID: <20151001095654.gb10...@amethyst.visucore.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 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
> ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> End of bitcoin-dev Digest, Vol 5, Issue 2
> *****************************************
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
