Satoshi 0.12.0

[Jet Cash]

One of my peers is running Satoshi: 0.12.0 - is that a new version with an imminent release?

[sniveling]

That might be a node running Bitcoin XT. This post mentions Satoshi 0.12.0 and is mostly about XT, but it suggests some changes to it, so perhaps your peer might be running an even more exotic wallet than XT.

If the core devs and Gavin agree on one change that will hard fork Bitcoin to mine and accept bigger blocks, I think most people would stop using XT and move back to the Satoshi client.

We could implement Mike's XT features later on down the road, like relaying the first observed double spend.

Core devs, how would you feel implementing the same type bigger block increase that's in XT, but make the increases smaller to something like this...?

Satoshi:0.12.0

Fork to 4MB blocks after 8 weeks of 80%+ of miners are using Satoshi:0.12.0. Earliest starting date on fork would be Feb 26 2016 at 00:00 (8 weeks after Jan 1 2016) .
Blocks increase by last two increases (one for 2018) every two years till 136MB blocks in 2030.

4MB 2016
8MB 2018
12MB 2020
20MB 2022
32MB 2024
52MB 2026
84MB 2028
136MB 2030

[cr1776]

One of my peers is running Satoshi: 0.12.0 - is that a new version with an imminent release?

If he is running 0.12, he is running a beta.  0.12.0 is hoped for by Feb 1, 2016, perhaps a bit earlier. So, yes release should be soon.

See:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-September/011182.html

[kiblirov]

Nice to hear you're running 0.12. It might get released by Feb 1 2016. And even there are more releases after 0.12. If your wallet is fine and secure, you don't need to worry about the version you use. It is much more important that you can send and receive funds flawlessly whatever version you have. Also ensure it is secure enough.

[Jet Cash]

I'm running 0.11.2, and I've got a peer running XT. I saw this 0.12.0 running for about an hour this morning. There weas also a 0.11.99 which I believe is a test version. Good to see there are some improvements on the way. Does anyone know what they are?

[achow101]

I'm running 0.11.2, and I've got a peer running XT. I saw this 0.12.0 running for about an hour this morning. There weas also a 0.11.99 which I believe is a test version. Good to see there are some improvements on the way. Does anyone know what they are?

Any satoshi client ending in 99 is a build of the matter branch from the git repo. 0.12 is a build from the 0.12 branch but 0.12 isn't ready for release.

[Jet Cash]

Thanks for the info and the link. It doesn't look as if there is anything in there that a small operator like me will need, so I think I'll stay with 0.11.2. Is that the best move for me?

[achow101]

Thanks for the info and the link. It doesn't look as if there is anything in there that a small operator like me will need, so I think I'll stay with 0.11.2. Is that the best move for me?

Yes. However when 0.12 is officially released in February, you should upgrade to it.

[Carlton Banks]

Thanks for the info and the link. It doesn't look as if there is anything in there that a small operator like me will need, so I think I'll stay with 0.11.2. Is that the best move for me?

The libsec256k/SSL deprecation will speed up your sync time, either you need that or you don't. But you're demonstrably making decisions for yourself already about which client (with which features) is "the best move for me", so I wouldn't expect many replies to your latter question.

[Jet Cash]

The libsec256k/SSL deprecation will speed up your sync time, either you need that or you don't. But you're demonstrably making decisions for yourself already about which client (with which features) is "the best move for me", so I wouldn't expect many replies to your latter question.

I've found that, human nature being what it is, if I make a statement of intent, then people seem to provide all the negative factors to indicate why I was wrong.

Your comment about speeding up sync time is valuable to me, and is an example of this. I'm still new to Bitcoin, and I have a mass to learn.

[Carlton Banks]

Try to find the positives from my former comment also. You can expect a better response to your questions if you are not, simultaneously:

• behaving as if you have a lot of experience to know what you're doing
• asking for direct answers to questions with subjective outcomes, as a consequence that you're not quite sure what you're doing

There's somewhat of a contradiction between those 2, and many will simply decline to answer at all (to wit, this thread). I hope that helps.

[Jet Cash]

I'm not sure I understand your post. I and most others know that I am a Bitcoin newbie. I read the link explaining the changes in 0.12, and there didn't appear to be anything relevant to me. I'm running a full node just to maintain a single wallet, so my needs are pretty basic.

If I'm giving offence, then I can reduce my posting.

[Carlton Banks]

Not at all, I think you did misunderstand.

Another benefit of 0.12 for those using the Core wallet (such as yourself) would be the ability to use the wallet with a pruned database size. This means the blockchain is stored upto a value (in MB) of your choice, instead of keeping all the oldest blocks. This feature existed in 0.11.x, but was incompatible with the operation of the wallet feature.

[dan91]

Not at all, I think you did misunderstand.

Another benefit of 0.12 for those using the Core wallet (such as yourself) would be the ability to use the wallet with a pruned database size. This means the blockchain is stored upto a value (in MB) of your choice, instead of keeping all the oldest blocks. This feature existed in 0.11.x, but was incompatible with the operation of the wallet feature.

If you turn pruning on though you stop becoming a "full node" still? In 0.11 you stop having incoming connections i think.

[Carlton Banks]

Another benefit of 0.12 for those using the Core wallet (such as yourself) would be the ability to use the wallet with a pruned database size. This means the blockchain is stored upto a value (in MB) of your choice, instead of keeping all the oldest blocks. This feature existed in 0.11.x, but was incompatible with the operation of the wallet feature.

If you turn pruning on though you stop becoming a "full node" still? In 0.11 you stop having incoming connections i think.

Ah, didn't know about that difference (the incoming connections part).

So, using the pruning mode is not very good for the health of the Bitcoin network for multiple reasons in the short term, but it's worthwhile if the long-term outcome is the possibility of a user using pruning mode later going on to acquire the resources/inclination to run a full node.

Seems reasonable, but we'll see how it works out in practice. One interesting outcome IMO: Bitcoin Core on Android would be a far more realistic proposition with wallet and prune now working together. Possibly still not practical for real-world use, but tantalising nonetheless.

[dan91]

For now, block pruning disables block relay. In the future, nodes with block pruning will at a minimum relay “new” blocks, meaning blocks that extend their active chain.

So maybe you will be able to relay in 0.12 but only current blocks it says 2 days is what it stores minimum, and not historical. If thats true it will increase the health in parts but if too many current full nodes switch it could slow down new nodes joining as historical nodes will become fewer and will have to serve more data?

[achow101]

Another benefit of 0.12 for those using the Core wallet (such as yourself) would be the ability to use the wallet with a pruned database size. This means the blockchain is stored upto a value (in MB) of your choice, instead of keeping all the oldest blocks. This feature existed in 0.11.x, but was incompatible with the operation of the wallet feature.

If you turn pruning on though you stop becoming a "full node" still? In 0.11 you stop having incoming connections i think.

Ah, didn't know about that difference (the incoming connections part).

So, using the pruning mode is not very good for the health of the Bitcoin network for multiple reasons in the short term, but it's worthwhile if the long-term outcome is the possibility of a user using pruning mode later going on to acquire the resources/inclination to run a full node.

Seems reasonable, but we'll see how it works out in practice. One interesting outcome IMO: Bitcoin Core on Android would be a far more realistic proposition with wallet and prune now working together. Possibly still not practical for real-world use, but tantalising nonetheless.

Not true. Pruning in 0.11 was bit very helpful since it wasn't completed yet. In 0.12 pruning is better. It still functions as a full node since all blocks and transactions are validated. It will also relay blocks and transactions. It should accept incoming connections as well. The wallet will be enabled as well.

[Carlton Banks]

Not true.

Which part? Everything you said corresponds with something I said.

[achow101]

Not true.

Which part? Everything you said corresponds with something I said.

The incoming connections part, not being a full node, and pruning not being helpful in the short term.

[dan91]

Not true.

Which part? Everything you said corresponds with something I said.

The incoming connections part, not being a full node, and pruning not being helpful in the short term.

But as it stands with 0.11 currently right now.. It does not relay blocks that was the point? We were saying it hopefully will in 0.12