Re: [bitcoin-dev] bitcoin-inquistion: evaluating soft forks on signet

2022-09-17 Thread Michael Folkson via bitcoin-dev
I agree with Matt. The less said about the "Aw shucks Jeremy didn't know that CTV didn't have community consensus at the time" [0] and "it was the lack of process that was the problem" the better. If people don't care about lack of community consensus there is no process in a permissionless, ope

Re: [bitcoin-dev] bitcoin-inquistion: evaluating soft forks on signet

2022-09-17 Thread Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev
On 9/17/22 2:14 AM, Anthony Towns wrote: On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 12:46:53PM -0400, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev wrote: On 9/16/22 3:15 AM, Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev wrote: As we've seen from the attempt at a CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY activation earlier in the year [0], the question of "how to

Re: [bitcoin-dev] On a new community process to specify covenants

2022-09-17 Thread Devrandom via bitcoin-dev
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 9:18 PM Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Hi Buck, > [...] > > I would vote against Slack. IRC is probably the best but maybe too high a > barrier to entry? Publishing logs at least would counter concerns of it > being exclusiv