BIP 148: Mandatory activation of segwit deployment
Consensus (soft fork), Specification, Deployed. By Shaolin Fry. First discussed on the list 14 Apr 2017; 28 threads and 364 messages in all.
The threads, in order
Listed by the date of each thread's first message.
2017 18 threads
- I do not support the BIP 148 UASF Gregory Maxwell34 messages
- I do not support the BIP 148 UASF Chris Acheson7 messages
- Exploring Network Rule Changes Cameron Garnham1 message
- Segwit v2 Luke Dashjr7 messages
- Barry Silbert segwit agreement shaolinfry4 messages
- 11 messages
- Hypothetical 2 MB hardfork to follow BIP148 Luke Dashjr13 messages
- Compatibility-Oriented Omnibus Proposal CalvinRechner8 messages
- 1 message
- 20 messages
- User Activated Soft Fork Split Protection James Hilliard29 messages
- The BIP148 chain split may be inevitable Jacob Eliosoff6 messages
- BIP148 temporary service bit (1 << 27) Luke Dashjr3 messages
- 18 messages
- BIP Idea : DDoS resistance via decentrilized proof-of-work Ilya Eriklintsev5 messages
- Height based vs block time based thresholds shaolinfry14 messages
- The Nuclear Option: BIP148 + MR POWA John Hardy3 messages
- A Segwit2x BIP Sergio Demian Lerner21 messages
2019 1 thread
- Burying CSV and segwit soft fork activations John Newbery3 messages
2020 2 threads
- Modern Soft Fork Activation Matt Corallo11 messages
- 2 messages
2021 6 threads
- Yesterday's Taproot activation meeting on lockinontimeout (LOT) Michael Folkson42 messages
- Proposal: Scheduled Activation with Potential Miner-Signaled Delay Efaula Prafbodous1 message
- Straight Flag Day (Height) Taproot Activation Matt Corallo15 messages
- Making the case for flag day activation of taproot Chris Belcher15 messages
- Supermajority then simple majority Taproot Activation Ariel Lorenzo-Luaces1 message
- Taproot activation proposal "Speedy Trial" David A. Harding16 messages
2022 1 thread
- Speedy Trial Russell O'Connor53 messages