Proposal: put bitcoind version in the coinbase

[oleganza]

Wouldn't it be nice if we could know how diverse is bitcoin software? Like when we consult web browser User-Agent distribution when deciding which new features to support and which old browsers to ignore. This could help miners see if they are in a risky position when 50% are running one software and 50% the other. Or if you are running a software which represents only 10% of the blocks and probably should be compatible with others to avoid accidental losses. This also could help developers see how quickly new updates are propagated, so new features can be rolled out more reliably.

My suggestion is to put a name of the software, release version and a partial git commit id.

E.g. "bitcoind 0.7.2 32a928e1" would mean Satoshi client version 0.7.2. Commit id would identify specific commit (possibly a patch to the released version). It would be nice if patched versions were published somewhere on Github, so people could see what exact changes should be taken into account.

This is not meant to be a strict machine-readable format (like "block version" from BIP 34, or protocol version from API), only an identifier for statistical purposes.

What do you think?

[Mike Hearn]

http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/branches.html

[jl2012]

I think more information should be put in the coinbase, e.g.

• Name/pseudonym of miner
• GPG public key of the miner
• Bitcoind version
• Transaction fee policy
• Email, Bitmessage, Torchat, etc. of the miner

In case there is emergency like an unintended hard fork, the miners could be reached easily. It also makes the transaction fee policy more transparent.