Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread Eric Lombrozo
I don’t think the issue is between larger blocks on the one hand and things like lightning on the other - these two ideas are quite orthogonal. Larger blocks aren’t really about addressing basic scalability concerns - for that we’ll clearly need architectural and algorithmic improvements…and

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread Mike Hearn
Yeah, but increasing block-size is not a longterm solution. Are you sure? That sort of statement is hard to answer because it doesn't say what you think long term is, or how much you expect Bitcoin to grow. Satoshi thought it was a perfectly fine long term solution because he thought hardware

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread GC
When is the right time to allow space pressure to rise that ratio? When the subsidy is at 1.5625, for example, it may be too late to I don¹t believe we have to decide, the miners will do that and are doing that already. start a non-catastrophic transition from subsidies to fees. I don't claim

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread Eric Lombrozo
On Jun 19, 2015, at 2:37 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Or alternatively, fix the reasons why users would have negative experiences with full blocks It's impossible, Mark. By definition if Bitcoin does not have sufficient capacity for everyone's transactions, some users who were

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread Benjamin
Yeah, but increasing block-size is not a longterm solution. Necessary higher fees are a logical consequence of lower subsidies. Bitcoin was basically free to use at the beginning because miners got paid with new coins at the expense of those who already hold coins. Eventually there needs to be a

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread GC
Benjamin, Timeframe for network congestion and users experiencing service degradation = between now and middle of next year. Timeframe for transaction fees topping block reward fees = many years in the future, based on current ratio of block reward to fees. What is the more pressing requirement

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread Jorge Timón
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Or alternatively, fix the reasons why users would have negative experiences with full blocks It's impossible, Mark. By definition if Bitcoin does not have sufficient capacity for everyone's transactions, some users who were

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread Brooks Boyd
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 4:37 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Or alternatively, fix the reasons why users would have negative experiences with full blocks It's impossible, Mark. *By definition* if Bitcoin does not have sufficient capacity for everyone's transactions, some users who

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-19 Thread Mike Hearn
Or alternatively, fix the reasons why users would have negative experiences with full blocks It's impossible, Mark. *By definition* if Bitcoin does not have sufficient capacity for everyone's transactions, some users who were using it will be kicked out to make way for the others. Whether

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Mike Hearn
And allegations that the project is run like wikipedia or an edit war are verifyably untrue. Check the commit history. This was a reference to a post by Gregory on Reddit where he said if Gavin were to do a pull request for the block size change and then merge it, he would revert it. And I

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Mike Hearn
If you think it's not clear enough, which may explain why you did not even attempt to follow it for your block size increase, feel free to make improvements. As the outcome of a block size BIP would be a code change to Bitcoin Core, I cannot make improvements, only ask for them. Which is

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Bryan Bishop
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 5:00 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Dude, calm down. Well hold on, his concerns are real and he seems perfectly calm to me and others apparently. and Gavin already said long ago he wouldn't just commit something, even though he has the ability to do so.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Milly Bitcoin
So I'm *not* the decider for anything that concerns the behavior of the global consensus, and I cannot be, as I have explained in the previous post. The person who decides if a pull request is accepted is a decider and significantly affects the behavior of the global consensus. The only

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Mark Friedenbach
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: The first issue is how are decisions made in Bitcoin Core? I struggle to explain this to others because I don't understand it myself. Is it a vote of people with commit access? Is it a 100% agreement of core developers and if

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Wladimir J. van der Laan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 This kind of thing always happens as projects become larger and more diverse. Something that was once a small group turns into a big group of diverse stakeholders. When it gets too big for the informal processes then some people get upset and

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Mike Hearn
So then: make a proposal for a better process, post it to this list. Alright. Here is a first cut of my proposal. It can be inserted into an amended BIP 1 after What belongs in a successful BIP?. Let me know what you think. The following section applies to BIPs that affect the block chain

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Milly Bitcoin
You misunderstand what I am saying. I am not saying I have a specific process that should be followed, I am saying that whatever the process is then it should be formalized or at least written down. That way the stakeholders have something to work with and keeps people on track. Since some

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Jeff Garzik
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:07 AM, justusranv...@riseup.net wrote: On 2015-06-18 14:53, Jeff Garzik wrote: Consensus changes - worded another way - change Bitcoin's Constitution - The Rules that everyone in the system is -forced- to follow, or be ignored by the system. Bitcoin does not and

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Wladimir J. van der Laan
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 06:05:58PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote: Once a draft BIP has been submitted to bitcoin-development for consideration, the Bitcoin Core maintainer will deliver a preliminary yes/no verdict within three weeks. This verdict may be informed by the debate that has taken part in

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread justusranvier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 2015-06-18 16:28, Jeff Garzik wrote: This is an engineering list. The quote precisely describes how the bitcoin consensus system functions. Users' choice is largely binary: Follow the rules, or bitcoin software ignores you. Software

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Chris Pacia
On 06/18/2015 06:33 PM, Mark Friedenbach wrote: * Get safe forms of replace-by-fee and child-pays-for-parent finished and in 0.12. * Develop cross-platform libraries for managing micropayment channels, and get wallet authors to adopt * Use fidelity bonds, solvency proofs, and other

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Melvin Carvalho
On 18 June 2015 at 12:00, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Dude, calm down. I don't have commit access to Bitcoin Core and Gavin already said long ago he wouldn't just commit something, even though he has the ability to do so. So why did I say it? Because it's consistent with what I've

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Alex Morcos
Not that I know how to do this, but would you be willing to attempt some other method of measuring just how much of a super-majority we have before deploying code? Maybe that information would be helpful for everyone. Obviously such a poll couldn't be perfect, but maybe better than the

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Milly Bitcoin
2) Changes to the consensus rules: As others have said, this isn't anyone's decision for anyone else. It's up to each individual user as to what code they run and what rules they enforce. So then why is everyone so up in arms about what Mike and Gavin are proposing if everyone is free to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Alex Morcos
Let me take a pass at explaining how I see this. 1) Code changes to Bitcoin Core that don't change consensus: Wladimir is the decider but he works under a process that is well understood by developers on the project in which he takes under reasonable consideration other technical opinions and

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Gavin Andresen
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Alex Morcos mor...@gmail.com wrote: Let me take a pass at explaining how I see this. 1) Code changes to Bitcoin Core that don't change consensus: Wladimir is the decider but he works under a process that is well understood by developers on the project in

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Mark Friedenbach
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: The whole point is getting out in front of the need, to prevent significant negative impact to users when blocks are consistently full. To do that, you need to (a) plan forward, in order to (b) set a hard fork date in

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread odinn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Regarding this proposal from Mike Hearn to remove consensus process from the BIP, which I think is unsound philosophy. I will address this briefly below. On 06/18/2015 09:05 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: So then: make a proposal for a better process, post

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Jeff Garzik
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Mark Friedenbach m...@friedenbach.org wrote: On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: The whole point is getting out in front of the need, to prevent significant negative impact to users when blocks are consistently full. To do

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Mark Friedenbach
Matt, I for one do not think that the block size limit should be raised at this time. Matt Corallo also started the public conversation over this issue on the mailing list by stating that he was not in favor of acting now to raise the block size limit. I find it a reasonable position to take that

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Ross Nicoll
There's some actually proposing inaction as an outright decision, but I more meant that at times it has felt like we would end up with inaction through momentum, combined with adoption rate making any hard fork more complex if it continues to be delayed. On 18/06/2015 22:42, Matt Whitlock

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread odinn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I maintain that you should apologize to those who traverse this list. What you are saying is digging yourself a deeper hole and is not merely embarrassing but is crossing a threshold in which you have used words, albeit subtly, to attack a community.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread Ross Nicoll
I'm struggling to illustrate how incredibly low 7 transactions per second is, not just for a payment network, but even just for a clearance network (i.e. to balance transactions between institutions and/or chains). As an example, the Clearing House Interbank Payments System (CHIPS) is a

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers

2015-06-18 Thread odinn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Regarding the bit on getting out in front of the need, to prevent significant negative impacts to users I had suggested the following: On 06/18/2015 03:52 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Mark Friedenbach m...@friedenbach.org