Re: [Bitcoin-development] multisig, op_eval and lock_time/sequence...
BIPs are either standards track (affects everyone, represents consensus), informational (ie basically just summarizing the authors viewpoints on things) or process. My point is you can't have a credible standards track BIP until something has been implemented end to end. I don't think it's a good plan to design these things in isolation. You'll end up with bizarre user experiences because of technical decisions taken months earlier that are now hard to reverse. A working end to end implementation gives you the confidence to say, yes, this is how it should work, because here's the demo and you can see it works very well and the code is clean. If your BIP is informational then no problems, but I don't think there's much point in informational BIPs to be honest - it's easier to just write an email or forum post summarizing your views on things. If you find it a useful framework to write your thoughts in that's OK, but don't expect implementors to follow what's written there just because it's a BIP. It carries no more weight than any other document would. -- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] multisig, op_eval and lock_time/sequence...
Sure, of course, as long as it's clearly labelled as just your thoughts, no issues. For dispute mediation the way I'd start is playing around with some UI design stuff and a toy protocol underneath. Once the process is smooth from the users POV (no seeing binary blobs disguised as text) then it should become clearer what steps the protocol needs and what order they need to come in. Specific feedback on this format - as far as I can tell the format represents a subset of the regular bitcoin transaction format? Couldn't you just serialize a Bitcoin CTransaction structure with the txins containing the output scripts? -- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] BIP 14 - Protocol Version and User Agent
Looks pretty reasonable to me. If Gavin changes the mainline client to use this format I'll change BitcoinJ as well. It'll need a bit of API work so clients are sure to set it up properly. On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Amir Taaki zgen...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0014 Thanks to Gavin Andresen for proof reading and suggesting clarifications. Thanks to Patrick Strateman for suggesting the hierarchical format and pointing out some flaws of browser user-agents to me. The timeline is written in the past tense since BIPs are meant to be readable in the future for explaining why we took certain decisions with bitcoin. A nice cache for future historians when bitcoin is ubiquitous ;) The next version 0.6 should be the protocol version which becomes peeled off from the current client. There are still some changes migrating into the protocol that need to be finished. -- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
