and how many versions of segnet testnet did they go through.. 1,2,3,4 oh wait.
your talking about the first segnet back when it was the elements design..
The first segnet was not the elements design. It was based on Bitcoin Core. At that point in time, segwit was not ready or polished enough to be tested on testnet, so they created segnet.
im talking about in spring, you know march2016.. spring... you know the time after december, but before may/june... when they were thrashing about with it to get it to be bitcoin compatible.. so they could possibly use it on a bitcoin testnet
During that time, it was already bitcoin compatible, just not polished or ready for testnet, which is why the segnets were created. It was most certainly Bitcoin compatible by segnet3 since I was doing testing on segnet3 with normal Bitcoin transactions and it all went perfectly fine. I'm pretty sure that it was bitcoin compatible in the previous segnets, but I personally did not try them out.
so if it was bitcoin -> segwit.. like your trying to suggest, then ask yourself..
why do segnet first, second, third, fourth, to get it then compatible enough to then open the bitcoin testnet..
again.. if it was bitcoin first.. it would have run on a bitcoin testnet first. and then developed to be more segwit-esq later...
(chicken and egg! comes to mind.) but the observations are simple.. it was segwit first
The public version of segwit that is up for activation began as a fork and modification of Bitcoin Core. The concept started on elements, but it was not the elements code made compatible with Bitcoin. The reason it was not deployed on testnet when they began implementation was because it is a consensus change and the developers wanted to test their changes without fucking up anything used publicly (i.e. testnet). The segnets were for "private" testing of segnet so that they could break things without causing major problems with other developers who were using testnet. Breaking testnet would mean that testnet would need to be reset, a much larger and harder task than resetting the segnets.
they activated on the 13th.. but lets see when they actually organised some proper tests
so tests didnt really start properly until the 23rd. i call that closer to JUNE than the start of may.. but screw it im a week and a half out.. boo hoo.. now your getting pedantic..
im secretly laughing by you "hinting" it was bitcoin compatible back before the december 31st announcement.. i really am
MOST tests that could be deemed bitcoin related (bar a week and a half) were done in JUNE onwards..
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/06/24/segwit-next-steps/Also in May 2016, twenty Bitcoin Core developers met in Switzerland for (among other things) an in-person review of the segwit code and ensuring that test coverage was adequate.
they then met up on the 20th.. to discuss for 3 days what tests they should do
https://bitcoincore.org/logs/2016-05-zurich-meeting-notes.htmllink is them spending 3 days reviewing code and discussing what test to do on the bitcoin testnet..
EG not doing official tests before this date
i say june.. u say december.. actual quotes say may 20th-23rd ish...before they started officially testing
and you think im more in the wrong?? please!!
december----/may/june whos closer..
im one and a half weeks out.. your... 5 months...... come on
Tests were being done on the segnets long before it was deployed on testnet. Why do you think they would not test it beforehand before deploying it on a semi-important network? They had to be confident that it would not break the testnet so they did testing on the segnets.
if there is no change to the wallet... why withhold the wallet.
There is a change to the wallets, but not in the way that you are describing. The change is related to output and script creation, not to the ECDSA keypairs.
Also, the wallet part of Bitcoin Core does support segwit. You can have it create the segwit address for an address in your wallet and it will know to track it and how to spend from it. What it doesn't do now is default to using segwit addresses by default (i.e. it just doesn't give you a segwit address when you ask for a new address).
how many bips needed to be activated just to help segwit along.. think about it..
There are 4 BIPs that are being deployed that are related to segwit (peer services, consensus, transactions, GBT). However that does not mean that there are 4 different implementations. There is one implementation specified in 4 documents so that the changes to those things are clearly defined.