Subnostr

Hello Nostr,

I am Grey, and today I am launching a project to cover developments and discussions regarding the bitcoin-dev mailing list, these posts will be titled "Bitcoin-Dev News". I will begin this project by providing (hopefully) unbiased coverage of what participants have to say and the arguements they posit. In the future editorialization may be added, this distinction will be made clear to readers; I am certainly not without my own opinions, but I fear we face growing polarization and drama in the bitcoin sphere, so I would like to begin by helping everyone understand the nuance of each others opinions in a fair and non-egotistical way.

Additional projects are pending, branching into educational topics to increase the level of knowledge (LOK) of our community as a whole is high on my list, as well as covering other areas like the cypherpunks mailing list. Finding a jumping-off point can be difficult, and I figure this might be a nice niche to get me into the groove of things.

I welcome criticism and suggestions, this is for you, the community, not for me. I have a day job, I have aliases for engaging in less critical activities. If you ever feel like I have misrepresented your views, or that I am offering a less than charitable interpretation then I would love to make amends and retractions.

Feel free to DM me or send me an email at professorgrey@protonmail.com.

Regards,

Grey

Grey 2y ago

Bitcoin Dev News

Bitcoin Core Maintainer Communication Issues

April 18, 2023

lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2023-April/021565.html

*Views expressed are not my own*

Michael Folkson has issued a criticism of the Bitcoin Core Dev team. There is a lack of communication regarding the decision making process maintainers are undergoing around merging updates to Bitcoin Core, where allegedly much of the discussion is being conducted in private IRC channels.

-A request to add Vasil Dimov as a maintainer was left publicly unacknowledged by maintainers fanquake and Gloria for an extended period of time.

-A request to merge CTV caused unnecessary drama around a contentious soft-fork; Core had signaled a general support of CTV conceptually, but failed to make it clear that the consensus change was not yet ready to be merged.

Folkson goes on to explain that launching new code on testnet alone isn't sufficient to prepare consensus changes, and recommends greater transparency from bitcoin core maintainers.

Reply to this note

Discussion