Yes, you can activate softforks at a given height. I don't see any reason why you couldn't rebase to 0.16 directly. The block version bumping was a mistake in bip34, you don't really need to bump the version number. In any case, I would recommend reading bip34 and what it activates in the code. IIRC the last thing was bip65.
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Samad Sajanlal via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Is it possible to activate soft forks such as BIP65 and BIP66 without prior > signaling from miners? I noticed in chainparams.cpp that there are block > heights where the enforcement begins. > > I understand this is already active on bitcoin. I'm working on a project > that is a clone of a clone of bitcoin, and we currently do not have BIP65 or > BIP66 enforced - no signaling of these soft forks either (most of the > network is on a source code fork of bitcoin 0.9). This project does not and > never intends to attempt to replace bitcoin - we know that without bitcoin > our project could never exist, so we owe a great deal of gratitude to the > bitcoin developers. > > If the entire network upgrades to the correct version of the software (based > on bitcoin 0.15), which includes the block height that has enforcement, can > we simply skip over the signaling and go straight into > activation/enforcement? > > At this time we are lucky that our network is very small, so it is > reasonable to assume that the whole network will upgrade their clients > within a short window (~2 weeks). We would schedule the activation ~2 months > out from when the client is released, just to ensure everyone has time to > upgrade. > > We have been stuck on the 0.9 code branch and my goal is to bring it up to > 0.15 at least, so that we can implement Segwit and other key features that > bitcoin has introduced. The 0.15 client currently works with regards to > sending and receiving transactions but the soft forks are not active. I > understand that activating them will segregate the 0.15 clients onto their > own fork, which is why I'd like to understand the repercussions of doing it > without any signaling beforehand. I also would prefer not to have to make > intermediate releases such as 0.10, 0.11.. etc to get the soft forks > activated. > > Another related question - does the block version get bumped up > automatically at the time that a soft fork activates, or is there additional > stuff that I need to do within the code to ensure it bumps up at the same > time? From what I saw in the code it appears that it will bump up > automatically, but I would like some confirmation on that. > > Regards, > Samad > > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
