Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Jean-Paul Kogelman
>> Having it on the BIP page doesn't make it any more official, I agree, but it >> does increase its exposure and will hopefully spark some more discussion. > > Having it on the BIP page *does* make it more official, at least the way > we've been using the BIP page, which is to filter out the pr

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Peter Todd
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 04:35:13PM -0700, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > >> See BIP 1 for the process.. proposals go to this mailing list first. > > > > FWIW, he did post to the mailing list and he got an underwhelming response: > > > > http://sou

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Jean-Paul Kogelman
On 2013-10-19, at 4:20 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: >> See BIP 1 for the process.. proposals go to this mailing list first. > > FWIW, he did post to the mailing list and he got an underwhelming response: > > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/fo

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Jean-Paul Kogelman
I submitted the proposal to the mailing list on July 19, 2003. On 2013-10-19, at 3:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > On Saturday, October 19, 2013 9:16:24 PM Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: >> I have a question regarding this part. I wrote a BIP for base 58 encoding / >> encryption of BIP 32 root keys. The BI

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Jean-Paul Kogelman
On 2013-10-19, at 4:21 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: > I submitted the proposal to the mailing list on July 19, 2003. That would be 2013. sorry. signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > See BIP 1 for the process.. proposals go to this mailing list first. FWIW, he did post to the mailing list and he got an underwhelming response: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=20ec1e35-3051-45d6-b449-e4a4d5c06dc8%40me.co

[Bitcoin-development] Root key encoding / BIP process Was: A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: > I have a question regarding this part. I wrote a BIP for base 58 encoding / > encryption of BIP 32 root keys. The BIP page states that we shouldn't add to > this list ourselves, but should contact you for a BIP number. I have > contac

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Luke-Jr
On Saturday, October 19, 2013 9:16:24 PM Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: > I have a question regarding this part. I wrote a BIP for base 58 encoding / > encryption of BIP 32 root keys. The BIP page states that we shouldn't add > to this list ourselves, but should contact you for a BIP number. I have > co

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Mike Hearn
I was hoping to see something interesting and useful, but all I saw was absurd ranting. Example quote: It is not known where bitcoin contributors are based. Gavin Andersson, a major contributor, is a well-known South African anarchist/crypto-libertarian. Most contributors hide their identities. I

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Jean-Paul Kogelman
On 2013-10-19, at 1:40 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > > "I wasn't even allowed to edit the wiki" > > I'm confused about this, if he's referring to en.bitcoin.it. Editing > it is open to anyone who is willing to pay the 0.01 > (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BitcoinPayment) anti-spam fee. This isn't >

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Mitar
Hi! Gregory, thank you for your time and answers. Just maybe to clarify where Nick is coming from, there are two previous articles: http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i290m-ocpp/site/article/nmerrill-assign1.html http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i290m-ocpp/site/article/nmerrill-assign2.html

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Mitar wrote: > Hi! > Interesting read: > http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i290m-ocpp/site/article/nmerrill-assign3.html Hopefully Nick will show up someplace and offer some specific pointers to where we failed him. The only interaction I can find from him on I

Re: [Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Melvin Carvalho
On 19 October 2013 18:38, Mitar wrote: > Hi! > > Interesting read: > > > http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i290m-ocpp/site/article/nmerrill-assign3.html > Im sympathetic to some of the points, but it seems slightly harsh. I do agree that we're lucky to have the excellent leadership of Gavin,

[Bitcoin-development] A critique of bitcoin open source community

2013-10-19 Thread Mitar
Hi! Interesting read: http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i290m-ocpp/site/article/nmerrill-assign3.html Mitar -- http://mitar.tnode.com/ https://twitter.com/mitar_m -- October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Inte

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP39 word list

2013-10-19 Thread Pavol Rusnak
On 19/10/13 01:58, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > https://people.xiph.org/~greg/wordlist.visual.py >> I've included the search utility I used below. Yeah, there are lots of tools on the Internet. Posting links to them is not helping. Sending pull requests with particular changesets with explanation is.