Re: [bitcoin-dev] Soft Fork Activation & Enforcement w/o Signaling?

Yes, in fact, you don't need to lose those bits like bitcoin by imposing that the version is greater than that. But I guess just doing the same is simpler. On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 7:14 AM, Samad Sajanlal wrote: > Excellent - Thanks for your response Jorge. This helps us

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Soft Fork Activation & Enforcement w/o Signaling?

Excellent - Thanks for your response Jorge. This helps us plan out the future upgrades properly. Since I see 0.15 and 0.16 use block versions as 0x2000, whereas the current deployed codebase (based on bitcoin 0.9.4) makes versions 0x0002 (as seen by a 0.15 client), it appears safe to

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Soft Fork Activation & Enforcement w/o Signaling?

Yes, you can activate softforks at a given height. I don't see any reason why you couldn't rebase to 0.16 directly. The block version bumping was a mistake in bip34, you don't really need to bump the version number. In any case, I would recommend reading bip34 and what it activates in the code.

[bitcoin-dev] Soft Fork Activation & Enforcement w/o Signaling?

Is it possible to activate soft forks such as BIP65 and BIP66 without prior signaling from miners? I noticed in chainparams.cpp that there are block heights where the enforcement begins. I understand this is already active on bitcoin. I'm working on a project that is a clone of a clone of