i would rather contribute to core. resources are already thin over there. don't see how this helps
Discussion
Well it would help decentralize Bitcoin. Don’t you think that we should have more than 1 bitcoin repo?
i think its a bad idea
nostr:note1emsxg9wh4tzsg8m4mfxhpr7n2nwwnh4cwp57jkz7upawv9vxvmss8we6an
But since its a fork its less bad
I mean knots is an older version of bitcoin core. Its core that has shifted.
from what I understand its maintained by a single person, whats the review process?
Yes I agree that knots could benefit from more maintainers. That would be awesome if you joined forces.
assuming luke rebases then it makes sense to contribute to core then it would improve both
Yeah but then you are justifying bitcoin core-ruption’s actions which is fine, that’s your choice.
what corruption? what did they do exactly?
They are baking in their mempool polices and eliminating user configuration.
There are like 15 baked in mempool policies, should we have configs for all those?
I’m for maximum choice let them default to whatever they suggest but let the user opt out. Seems like you are steering away from the “core” issue.
I'm all for customization actually:
nostr:note1k5al0r2emllgff754phc6akmvcelvnm57hum7sqzdwkxan37plsswzm777
but arguing over settings isn't the way
But caving into shitcoiners demands is the way?
i don't agree with this framing at all. this is my view:
nostr:note1s0njmpyl4tvjx976fuqev2dskk4yl06uludvxsyedfckgxylj3zs3azqjy
Agree to disagree
Net result will be
1.More difficult to run a node which leads to-less node runners
2.Less user choice
3.Higher sat/vB over time
There is no clear cohesive benefit for doing this.
Luke must approve!