Author: Johnson Lau 2016-09-04 12:29:37
Published on: 2016-09-04T12:29:37+00:00
The discussion is about whether it is appropriate to bundle two independent softforks in one release, as it increases the burden of testing and maintenance. Testing needs to be done for four scenarios: both not activated, only NULLDUMMY activated, only SEGWIT activated, and both activated. A non-negligible percentage of miners are hard-coding the block version number, which increases the risks of softfork transition as miners may not enforce what they are signaling. Making 2 independently softforks would double the risks, and NULLDUMMY alone is not worth the risks.On September 2, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev questioned why the two independent softforks should be bundled together and suggested that miners should have the opportunity to vote on them independently. The BIP will be deployed by "version bits" BIP9 using the same parameters for BIP141 and BIP143, with the name "segwit" and using bit 1.
Updated on: 2023-05-19T23:52:41.110734+00:00