On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 1:36 PM, jl2012 <jl2...@xbt.hk> wrote: > 4.  In the miners round table on the second day, one of the devs mentioned > that he didn't want to be seen as the decision maker of Bitcoin.  On the > other hand, Chinese miners repeatedly mentioned that they want several > concrete proposals from devs which they could choose.  I see no > contradiction between these 2 viewpoints.  >

This was a very interesting dynamic, and seems fair (menu).  > 6.  I believe we should avoid a radical "Economic Change Event" at least in > the next halving cycle, as Bitcoin was designed to bootstrap the adoption > by high mining reward in the beginning.  For this reason, I support an early > and conservative increase, such as BIP102 or 2-4-8.  2MB is accepted by most > people and it's better than nothing for BIP101 proponents.  By "early" I > mean to be effective by May, at least 2 months before the halving.  > That was precisely my logic for picking May 5 as the hard fork date.  Some buffer before halving, enough for caution and iteration in the meantime.  > > (c) My most optimistic guess is SW will be ready in 6 months, which will > be very close to halving and potential tx volume burst.  And it may not be > done in 2016, as it does not only involve consensus code, but also change > in the p2p protocol and wallet design > Not just wallet design -- you have to game through the standard steps of: update dev lib (bitcoin-core.js/bitcoinj) + release cycle, update app + release cycle, for most actors in the ecosystem, on top of the Bitcoin Core roll out. 

_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev