Here is Luke himself claiming it. There have also been quite a few interactions I’ve had myself with individuals claiming it. https://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2024-05-02.html#l-573
Here is a thread where a popular “educational” thread on knots claims that knots has 6 maintainers. The author disagrees with me but eventually concludes that Luke can’t be “the 6th maintainer”… and then uses some other vague way of trying to describe it.
Point being, many people are claiming really odd and untrue things. It’s important that people make an educated decision about the code they run.
The guy literally explained it to you in the Twitter thread.
It’s a play on words- where Luke is 1 extra dev compared to the core software which is 99.99% of knots.
No one is claiming knots is more reviewed or maintained better than core.
And also arguing about this is infantile and since Core repeatedly said:
“go run knots if you don’t like what we do”
It only serves to throw the last of Core’s public relation credibility into the shredder.
Oh I agree it’s a stupid conversation, but here we are because people like yourself are pretending this comparison (that the OP is trying to clarify) isn’t happening.
Luke in literally the first line. It’s not a play on words.
You claimed there were no examples, I provided some. You can say it’s not important, but you can’t say the thing Murch is addressing is not happening.
If knots is such a terrible unsafe implementation, why have the Core devs been encouraging everyone to "just use other software like knots" if we do not like their proposed changes?
