• locuester@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    It’s no different. A new version of the consensus code needs written and deployed.

    That page you linked is the same on all chains. All have a proposal, discussion, implementation, waiting period (for code to be deployed), and activation. That’s just blockchain 101

    • Hirom@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      same on all chains. All have a proposal, discussion, implementation, waiting period (for code to be deployed), and activation

      I though most of those steps didn’t occur on-chain in the case of bitcoin. But I could be mistaken.

      Would you mind sharing a link with the equivalent information on bitcoin, ie its governance process and how each governance operation (proposal, vote, activation ) is handled by the chain?

      I’m looking at BIP-1. It explains how to submit a proposal via mailing list and versioned repository, ie off-chain.

      Also looking at BIP-9. It does rely on the chain for governance, and allow polling for the most popular soft-fork. But it focus on exclusively on testing soft forks, which severely limit its usefulness.

      allowing multiple backward-compatible changes (further called “soft forks”) to be deployed in parallel.

      It seems BIP-9 doesn’t provide a solution to propose/vote/activate the larger non-backward-compatible changes, ie doesn’t help prevent hard forks. And big social and environmental issues affecting bitcoin probably require such large change.