>
> I agree. It would be even sillier to start specifying container formats
> for random one-off "that would be kind of nice, I guess" features.
>
No, it'd be sensible.
Here's a list I drew up a long time ago of features I imagined adding to
the payment protocol:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270055.msg2890147#msg2890147
The protocol is there to contain features! There is zero benefit to
slavishly following some religious notion of purity or minimalism here. The
shared resource in question is just varint encoded integers. So, we should
be guided by what will help our users and what will help adoption.
Anyway, Gavin asked me to start handling more BIP 70 stuff a few weeks ago.
I want to use something simple to set up the extensions process more
formally. IMO we need a "living document" version of the payment protocol
with all the different extensions out there folded into it, to simplify
programming tasks and ensure field numbers don't collide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
