Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev writes:
> This BIP has been assigned BIP112 by the BIP repository maintainer. I
> have updated the pull request accordingly.
>
> Regarding the suggestion to cannibalise version, by your own
> disadvantage list, we would lose fine grained control over txins which
> neuters
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> I don't get how it's very risky to have the Mike and Gavin redirect the
> course of the bitcoin protocol but it's totally fine to consider complex
> miner voting protocols as a hard fork option.
Maybe this helps undesrtandin
I don't get how it's very risky to have the Mike and Gavin redirect the
course of the bitcoin protocol but it's totally fine to consider complex
miner voting protocols as a hard fork option.
I believe that this community has not given due weight to the analysis
proposed by Peter__R on the existenc
Breadwallet also implements CPFP when spending unconfirmed non-change
inputs. It was released back in May, but happy to let Andreas have the
bounty:
https://github.com/voisine/breadwallet/blob/v0.5.1/BreadWallet/BRWallet.m#L382
Aaron Voisine
co-founder and CEO
breadwallet.com
On Wed, Jul 15, 20
Can we please keep this mail chain discussion specific to the proposed
draft -
https://github.com/UpalChakraborty/bips/blob/master/BIP-DynamicMaxBlockSize.mediawiki
?
I understand, voting process is an important subject of discussion. But,
that may be discussed in a separate mail chain.
On Wed, A
