On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:42 AM, Cory Fields via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > I'm not sure why Bitcoin Core and the rules and policies that it > enforces are being conflated in this thread. There's nothing stopping > us from adding the ability for the user to decide what their consensus > parameters should be at runtime. In fact, that's already in use: > ./bitcoind -testnet. As mentioned in another thread, the chain params > could even come from a config file that the user could edit without > touching the code.
For what is worth, here's yet another piece of code from the "doing nothing" side: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6382 It allows you to create a regtest-like testchain with a maximum block size chosen at run time. Rusty used a less generic testchain for testing 8 MB blocks: http://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=509 Unfortunately I don't know of anybody that has used my patch to test any other size (maybe there's not that much interest in testing other sizes after all?). I'm totally in favor of preemptively adapting the code so that when a new blocksize is to be deployed, adapting the code is not a problem. Developers can agree on many changes in the code without users having to agree on a concrete block size first. I offer my help to do that. That's what I'm trying to do in #6382 and http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008961.html but to my surprise that gets disregarded as "doing nothing" and as "having a negative attitude", when not simply ignored. _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
