Author: Jorge Timón 2015-08-19 10:31:58
Published on: 2015-08-19T10:31:58+00:00
In a discussion about version control for the CLTV upgrade, it was suggested that using version=4 would not be a problem if it wasn't for the XT/nonXT issue. One participant in the discussion asked about implementing a "non-full" version instead of going with the full implementation directly, to which another participant explained that versionbits has not been implemented yet and is still in review stage. If versionbits is not ready for deployment, they need a deployment method, which could be another IsSuperMajority() rollout in the interim. They believe that the deployment method is less important than the actual featureset being proposed and that perfection should not be the enemy of progress. However, the features in the next soft fork proposal are all related and best deployed as one featureset softfork. Going forward, versionbits seems essential to roll out multiple features in parallel without waiting for activation and enforcement each time.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T20:29:30.442635+00:00