On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Mike Hearn <m...@plan99.net> wrote: > priority. So a single unified program that just figures it out automatically > rather than expecting users to assemble a bag of parts seems a goal worth > striving for.
As I've said before -- and I think we disagree here - I like moving towards a bag of parts of specialized tools, maintained by people that specialize in those tools, instead of a single project that aims to do and know everything. This encourages experimentation and makes competition possible and I think that is healthy in this space. Bitcoin has a strict need for consensus in the block chain format, scripting system and validation. Outside of those, innovation should be possible without any gatekeeper bottleneck or even widespread agreement. Wallets, what data to store on disk, what indices to maintain. But even P2P message extensions, as long as it doesn't interfere with the rest of the network. After an experiment is successful it could always be merged into bitcoin core. But then the 'what-ifers' have less ammo, as it has been tested in the real world. For user convenience it's still possible to package pre-assembled bags. But that doesn't need to figure into how things are developed. Wladimir ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
