Author: joe2015 at openmailbox.org 2015-12-30 16:27:50
Published on: 2015-12-30T16:27:50+00:00
In this email exchange, Marco Falke questions the categorization of a proposed approach as a soft fork. Joe clarifies that it depends on the definition of "softfork". While his original write-up referred to it as a "generalized" softfork, others have suggested calling it a "firm" fork or other names. Joe emphasizes that what it is called is not very important in the end. The discussion also touches on the implications of softforks not requiring nodes to upgrade and how Joe's approach would require nodes to upgrade, leaving those who do not vulnerable to double spends. This email exchange provides insight into the technical details and considerations involved in proposing changes to the Bitcoin protocol.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T02:48:54.957830+00:00