Jorge Timón <jti...@jtimon.cc> writes: > On Sep 20, 2015 10:58 PM, "Rusty Russell" <ru...@rustcorp.com.au> wrote: >> >> Jorge Timón <jti...@jtimon.cc> writes: >> > I disagree with the importance of this concern and old soft/hardforks > will >> > replace this activation mechanism with height, so that's an argument in >> > favor of using the height from the start. This is "being discussed" in a >> > thread branched from bip99's discussion. >> >> Thanks, I'll have to dig through bitcoin-dev and find it. > > The initial thread is linked to from the BIP document (which is in the > bitcoin/bips PR).
Thanks, read and digested. The good news is that timeout via GetMedianTimePast() doesn't have any effect on "should I accept this to mempool", and seems pretty uncontroversial. Activation is by block number once vote hits 95%, so that too is fairly simple to implement. Cheers, Rusty. _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
