POLL: What is the reason hard forks require broad consensus? - page 2.

Possum577

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!

Quote from: Zangelbert Bingledack on November 16, 2015, 05:09:09 PM

Food for thought... Why Meni Rosenfeld doesn't fear contentious hard forks:

http://fieryspinningsword.com/2015/08/25/how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-fork/

It absolutely needs to happen. I think the debate was about does it need to be forced now or can it be arrived at organically, once it is really needed.

Zangelbert Bingledack

legendary

Activity: 1036

Merit: 1000

Food for thought... Why Meni Rosenfeld doesn't fear contentious hard forks:

http://fieryspinningsword.com/2015/08/25/how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-fork/

Possum577

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!

You can't have a fork succeed if a majority of the volume of transactions will be able to be routed to the new system, to the fork.

But, idealistically you'd generate some sort of consensus among the community that the approach and timing of the fork is agreed up. Ideally isn't always reality though.

Zangelbert Bingledack

legendary

Activity: 1036

Merit: 1000

"Hard forks require broad consensus" is a common sentiment among the Core developers and the wider community. I want to get a sense of whether this is justified more by fairness/image considerations or more by perceptions that contentious hard forks are technically unworkable.

*For example, Adam Back said on reddit recently, "the network can not reach consensus with multiple competing incompatible consensus algorithms vying for control."

Topic: POLL: What is the reason hard forks require broad consensus? - page 2. (Read 1226 times)