Author: Mike Hearn 2015-10-05 11:28:13
Published on: 2015-10-05T11:28:13+00:00
The discussion is centered around the definition of a "working" full node, with one party defining it as verifying everything and the other party arguing that skipping bits means it's not working according to its original design goals. The conversation then moves on to the topic of hard forks versus soft forks, with one person suggesting a new flag be introduced to Core, allowing nodes to prioritize correctness by default while still giving them the option of opting in to pseudo-SPV behavior. This suggestion is praised for simplifying all software and prioritizing correctness over availability. Arguments against hard forks are addressed, including the claim that they require everyone to upgrade (which the suggester argues isn't true) and that they can lead to schisms (which the suggester says is not a reason to avoid holding votes).
Updated on: 2023-06-10T23:18:31.726197+00:00