Due to the uneven reputation factor of various devs, and uneven review
attention for new pull requests, this exercise would work best as a
secret sortition.
Sortition would encourage everyone to always be on their toes rather
than only when dealing with new github accounts or declared Red Team
Good morning ZmnSCPxj,
Although its evening here and time zones feel irrelevant since I got involved
in Bitcoin few years back. Initially I tried everything a tech enthusiast does
after finding such thing online. Had a startup in 2017 which was a website that
can be used to buy flight tickets
This pull request was mentioned in the thread: "Proposal: Package Mempool
Accept and Package RBF" however I am not sure if everyone would have read all
the emails if they were not interested in packages. Also not possible to keep
track of each pull request in Bitcoin Core repository.
PR:
mostly thinking out loud
suppose there is a "lightweight" node:
1. ignores utxo's below the dust limit
2. doesn't validate dust tx
3. still validates POW, other tx, etc.
these nodes could possibly get forked - accepting a series of valid,
mined blocks where there is an invalid but ignored dust
Good morning Prayank,
I think this is still good to do, controversial or no, but then I am
permanently under a pseudonym anyway, for what that is worth.
> Few questions for everyone reading this email:
>
> 1.What is better for Security? Trusting authors and their claims in PRs or a
> good
Hi Ruben,
> encouraging an environment of increased mistrust
I have always tried to review pull requests based on what PR does, code, my
tests etc. and it was never based on author of pull request or what author is
trying to claim. So there is no trust involved. I am assuming others follow the
Jumping in late to this thread.
I very much agree with how David Harding presents things, with a few comments
inline.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Sunday, August 8th, 2021 at 5:51 PM, David A. Harding via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> > 1. it's not our business what outputs people want to
