Author: Jorge Timón 2015-08-19 10:53:30
Published on: 2015-08-19T10:53:30+00:00
In an email conversation, a discussion was held regarding the scheduled hardfork that is to occur on June 1, 2016. The person who initiated the discussion had proposed an experiment which would involve increasing the block size for the purpose of collecting data that could be used to design further hardforks. The goal was to show the world that reaching consensus for a Bitcoin hardfork is possible. However, the proposed increase in block size was deemed too controversial. The proposer suggested a 1.5MB increase, while others argued that this may not be uncontroversial unless accompanied by quantified risk data. The discussion then turned towards the issue of scheduling the hardfork. While some believed it should happen before the halving, others thought it should be scheduled at least a year after deployment in the newest versions to ensure everyone has time to upgrade. It was also argued that softforks are safer than hardforks, but the recent BIP66 fork showed that non-upgrading full nodes are not full nodes. The length of grace period necessary for a hardfork was also debated, with some suggesting four months is enough and others proposing up to five years. The conclusion was that many people won't update until they must do so, but the length of grace period is still important.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T20:18:45.225370+00:00