Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP Draft] Decentralized Improvement Proposals

2016-01-03 Thread Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev
Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev writes: > On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 6:22:59 PM Tomas wrote: >> > The specification itself looks like an inefficient and bloaty reinvention >> > of version bits. >> >> The actual assignment of version bits isn't clear from the >> specification. Are you saying that

Re: [bitcoin-dev] An implementation of BIP102 as a softfork.

2016-01-03 Thread joe2015--- via bitcoin-dev
On 2016-01-03 02:46, Marco Falke wrote: 2015-12-30 17:27 GMT+01:00 : On 2015-12-30 18:33, Marco Falke wrote: This is an interesting approach but I don't see how this is a soft fork. (Just because something is not a hard fork, doesn't make it a soft fork by definition) Softforks don't require