seems more reasonable to run core 28 or 29
are you going to bring on more maintainers or is your plan to just keep shipping knots releases on your own
Discussion
bring on more maintainers
OR
stand by principles AND actually hard fork
(and bring on more maintainers)
Main character syndrome is real
Please recommend 29, not 28. 29 enables zero-fee-commitments for lightning, which is a really important feature in some cases!
I have a question, is v30 the final decision by core team?
Final decision on what? They changed defaults, you can change them in bitcoin.conf pretty easily…
Well didn't core change the definition of the feature? So reinstating the previous default parameter doesn't reinstate the previous feature.
No. Changing the config to the previous default basically has the same outcome as the previous code.
Not sure most people are aware of the benefits (I'm not).
My understanding is that the commitment transaction is basically the transactions you are "passing around" with the other side of a lightning channel, your updates to the "bar tab". There is an issue that if these are too old, when you try to force close a channel, it fails because the fee to the miner is too low, so we need a mechanism for either side to bump the fee.
If this is correct, can you complete it with why is it important to support zero fee commitments and what exactly do they solve? (Or share a link 🙂)
by the looks of things Luke should get some maintainers because things seem to be taking off for Knots
no version of core can detect inscriptions
One respected manteiner >>>>>>> a bunch of mentally challenged kids with funds.
Only one maintainer ships each Core release.
The "on your own" has always been nothing but FUD.
the latest core release was signed by over ten people
the latest knots release was only signed by you
That's simply not true at all.
He's dealing with a bit of harassment. In his mind that's a good excuse to blame you for it and also believe any other untrue things about you or Knots or Bitcoin that he feels like believing on a whim. Not justified reasoning but that is how most people think, sadly.
i checked both myself, please explain what is not true to all of us?
Releases can only be signed by True Catholics, of which Luke is the only one (all other self proclaimed Christians are heretics according to Luke Logic)
The answer is obviously the most retarded: Luke considers all signatures from the Core version to be signatures for the Knots extension/fork.
more than 10 signatures: https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-30.0/SHA256SUMS.asc
only your sig: https://bitcoinknots.org/files/29.x/29.2.knots20251010/SHA256SUMS.asc
anyone can verify that themselves, weird thing to lie about
You can’t reason with mentally ill delusionals hashtag Bitcoin’s savior hashtag ardent catholic aka the global boy rape cult
There are 3 signatures in the Knots 29.2 signature file.
Your brainless retarded comment only shows your 0 intellect.
It’s signed by Luke and bigshiny90@gmail.com
Bitcoin’s sole intent.
Let’s keep on task please.
3 sigs as of this morning.. more guix happening. What are you even talking about?
3 signatures and counting, verified myself. Did you?
he swapped the file, look at the timestamp of the last sig
glad there are more signers
Signature file on GitHub says it’s 4 hours old. Did you verify when it first came out I guess?
curl -s "https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/releases/tags/v29.2.knots20251010" | jq '.published_at'
"2025-10-10T23:19:47Z"
That’s when the release was published.
The signature file was updated at my local time 8:57AM today. Odell’s tweet was at 9:51AM.
Sounds like a misunderstanding
curl -s "https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/releases/tags/v29.2.knots20251010" | jq '.updated_at'
"2025-10-13T13:57:16Z"
Correct
And for reference Odells note about only one signature was at 2025-10-13T13:28:25Z and 30 minutes later 2025-10-13T13:57:16Z the signature file is updated on github with 2 more signatures.
The 2nd signature was created 2 days ago. Not sure when it was added to the GitHub release.
https://github.com/bitcoinknots/guix.sigs/tree/knots/29.2.knots20251010
Yes. I am just correcting my criticism. Odell does in fact know how to read a text file 😂. The file was swapped out after he checked it.
👍 nice everyone shake hands.
nostr:nprofile1qqsqfjg4mth7uwp307nng3z2em3ep2pxnljczzezg8j7dhf58ha7ejgprpmhxue69uhhqun9d45h2mfwwpexjmtpdshxuet5qyvhwumn8ghj7um9dejxjapwdehhxenvv9ex2tnrdaksepv2a6 come up with a better reason why you don’t like knots
Looking forward to a 3rd implementation, I hate core more than I love knots.
Not that anyone cares about my opinion, but I think the reason for the lack of consensus with core vs knots is became everyone is arguing over tradeoffs.
It's a tradeoff between decentralization and censorship resistance.
We can't have 100% of both. There is a dial in between and where should we set that dial.
I don’t agree with that framing, filtering out a certain class of txns (spam) isn’t censorship.
Censorship is filtering out individual txns based on individual characteristics.
Filters have been around forever, they’ve been working just fine.
The busy body dumbfucks at core should have left things alone. If they wanted to tinker with fun little open source projects they should have found something else and left my money alone.
Filtering out a certain class of transactions isn't censorship (agreed), but it does resemble ad blocker behavior which is a form of centralization. In ad blockers, they all query a centralized list, or have trended to do so. Gov can put pressure on anything that is centralized. Yes filters work. That's the problem and solution unfortunately. Hence tradeoff between censorship resistance and decentralization.
To be fair to him, judging by the timestamps, it doesn’t look like it was done as a response to your note.
But a few days ago was just a single signature.
Shiny signed it 2 days ago atraxia an hour-ish before your note
https://github.com/bitcoinknots/guix.sigs/tree/knots/29.2.knots20251010
Are you gonna give it a try now? 😄
I attested all Knots releases since v25.1. knots20231115.
Haven't attested v29.2.knots20251010 yet because it just came out. Thanks for the reminder.
There we go.
7 signers (so far) for Knots v29.2.knots20251010.
https://github.com/bitcoinknots/guix.sigs/tree/knots/29.2.knots20251010
Just keep running core 28 or 29 if you don't like knots
this still does not prove that bitcoin core is not compromised. the ethical thing to do is to push for no core upgrades
Others are coming, including myself.
I sign all release of Knots since v25.1.
ODELL is the new Bitcoin Knots maintainer. LFG!!!
Running v28.01 until dust settles 🤙