Bitcoin Core is Seeking to Overhaul How it Upgrades its Code

[OmegaStarScream]

The Bitcoin Core team is looking to refresh the process by which code changes are proposed, considered and implemented in a bid to engage more people in the development of the protocol.

But this remains a significant challenge in a diverse and distributed community.

The current process goes like this: If a community member has an idea for an update, he or she proposes it to the group by sending a description through a public mailing list. If enough people think the update is worth deploying, a Bitcoin Improvement Process (BIP) document is created and posted to the bitcoin GitHub. That document can then be commented on further by the community.

Once the document has "rough consensus" – defined as the general sense that everyone more or less is on board with the idea – it gets merged into the reference client, although it’s still pending review at that point.

Article : http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-core-bip-process-speed-changes/

I know it's little bit off topic but while we are speaking about the Bitcoin Core and the updates related to it , when are we supposed to see SegWit ?

[InternationalBankAlliance]

Once the document has "rough consensus" – defined as the general sense that everyone more or less is on board with the idea – it gets merged into the reference client, although it’s still pending review at that point.

Good ... good...

[spazzdla]

The cartel attacks from every angle.... :S...   I have fears this entire forum will be controlled by those that seek to control BTC to control the masses... Burn this place down before that happens themos..

[InternationalBankAlliance]

Burn this place down before that happens themos..

You know who else had scorched earth policy? Hitler!

[rizzlarolla]

Coindesk quote from OP,

Once the document has "rough consensus" – defined as the general sense that everyone more or less is on board with the idea – it gets merged into the reference client, although it’s still pending review at that point.

Is there no rough consensus for a small block size increase? no simple bip?
If core wanted to be inclusive...


Quote OP,

I know it's little bit off topic but while we are speaking about the Bitcoin Core and the updates related to it , when are we supposed to see SegWit ?

I've not seen any recent updates.
No talk of segwit here on bct, oh, except Carlton Banks posting,

SegWit soft fork and the various Lightning implementations continue apace, so one wonders what you're referring to. If you're unaware of the scaling plans and their level of progress/acceptance, you only have yourself to blame.

So no, unlike Carlton, I have no idea either.

[mookid]

Bitcoin Core is on the right track if they keep being transparent about its operations and roadmap. Some people argue that Core developers are owned by Blockstream, but I don't think like that, everyone is free to work on what they want.

[yayayo]

The cartel attacks from every angle.... :S...   I have fears this entire forum will be controlled by those that seek to control BTC to control the masses... Burn this place down before that happens themos..

I agree. The new approach might lead to problematic results, because it opens up the development process to political campaigns, where sh*tloads of trolls and sheeple might be used to push bad features that at least undermine the usability of Bitcoin core.

We don't need a fast track to innovation and we don't need a feature-blown Bitcoin core suited for any exotic purpose - what we need first and foremost is security and privacy. Personally I'm fine leaving this task to the proven experts.

ya.ya.yo!

[franky1]

this issue with the mailing /github is that the same bigshots of the mailing list are the same bigshots of github. so its not really a community open platform. its a one sided double bluff..

its strange how stupid things like luke Jr's hardfork idea's that give little to nothing that will truly help bitcoin, get so much admiration and leap frog into being a proposal.. yet other things by other people get blindly ignored even before the community get to see the details of it.

all because those with commit power of github automatically get the biggest voices of the mailing list to veto out the plans before they even get a second reading.

its like trying to petition the UK government to discuss in parliament if a tory MP should resign, by filing a petition on a government website that is reviewed by the tories before even getting a chance to be discussed in parliament. let alone a chance to vote on making the mp resign

or if american

its like trying to petition the US senate to discuss at congress if a republican senator should resign.. by filling out a petition on a congress website that is reviewed by republican senates before even getting a chance to be discussed at congress, let alone a chance to vote on making the senator resign.

[Kakmakr]

this issue with the mailing /github is that the same bigshots of the mailing list are the same bigshots of github. so its not really a community open platform. its a one sided double bluff..

its strange how stupid things like luke Jr's hardfork idea's that give little to nothing that will truly help bitcoin, get so much admiration and leap frog into being a proposal.. yet other things by other people get blindly ignored even before the community get to see the details of it.

all because those with commit power of github automatically get the biggest voices of the mailing list to veto out the plans before they even get a second reading.

its like trying to petition the UK government to discuss in parliament if a tory MP should resign, by filing a petition on a government website that is reviewed by the tories before even getting a chance to be discussed in parliament. let alone a chance to vote on making the mp resign

or if american

its like trying to petition the US senate to discuss at congress if a republican senator should resign.. by filling out a petition on a congress website that is reviewed by republican senates before even getting a chance to be discussed at congress, let alone a chance to vote on making the senator resign.

Can you elaborate on the bigshots in charge of the mailing list and also on github? I was always under the impression that these two things were independent of each other? You also saying some things by other people gets blindly ignored. Who are these people and what was their proposals?

They could still use other platforms to promote their ideas? Gavin has his own domain/website and Roger Ver created a alternative to r\Bitcoin on Reddit and this forum.

[Enotche]

Well, it's just wonderful! It's democratic. Everyone can find bugs and suggest ways to correct them or innovations. What will bring Bitcoin to a new level.
It is necessary to establish a system, for example in the form of petitions.

[unamis76]

So BIP's will cease to exist? I can't really see how we can improve this system... But there might be ways.

I find it odd that this idea to change was brought up, but there isn't really any BIP replacement ideas on the works... It's easy to say "let's change", harder to bring in new ideas.