Author: Jorge Timón 2015-09-22 18:12:41
Published on: 2015-09-22T18:12:41+00:00
Jeff Garzik, a contributor to Bitcoin development, took issue with the apparent lack of planning over the creation of libconsensus. Libconsensus is an effort to move consensus state and code into a specific, separate library. Garzik stated that he read every code change in every pull request made on Github except for consensus code movement changes, which he deemed too chaotic, frequent and unfocused. He also complained that several people had complained to him about all the code movement changes breaking their own work. Garzik suggested that more complex code changes with longer development cycles than simple code movement patches keep breaking, causing problems for developers. Garzik also expressed frustration that despite everyone agreeing that separating libconsensus was a priority, nobody thought that reviewing the necessary refactors to do so was a priority. Garzik argued that it was very easy for a project to fall into a trap where it merged lots of cosmetic changes and not seeing the downstream ripple effects. Pieter Wuille, another contributor, responded by saying that just because Garzik did not understand the changes proposed it did not mean they were random. He stated he may have done a poor job communicating his plan for libconsensus, but he had tried many times in different ways. Wuille suggested that he had not worked “in the dark” at all, and had been very tenacious when asking for reviews. He provided the link to a recent thread where he described his plan, as well as smaller one-little-step PRs that were part of a longer branch. Wuille consolidated three of these branches recently, hoping they would be merged relatively fast.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T22:30:13.840147+00:00