On 2017-01-26 20:28, poweru...@openmailbox.org wrote:
On 2017-01-26 19:49, Michel Behr wrote:
It seems like a deadlock: Bitcoin deals with money (very serious), but
ports offer no guarantee, and naive users put their trust on ports.
Ideas: even more explicit messages like "IF YOU LOOSE YOUR BTCs IT'S
YOUR PROBLEM"; plus a specially rigorous criteria to let the package
in ("Mr Maintainer: if you don't update this at least monthly (?) and
follow these directives we will take this port out").
..
Conclusion: BitcoinD is as safe as or safer than on other platforms.
Reflections?
Ah, Michel, a small clarification: Please note that any regular updates
to net/bitcoin(d) would be of the same priority as that of any other
system software.
This is because the Bitcoin network has a built-in versioning mechanism
and old nodes are included only to the extent that they are up to date.
Following BitcoinD's HEAD could maybe potentially have caused trouble in
some instance in the past, so maybe giving new releases 30 days of
public quarantaine before being taken into the ports tree, could be a
good idea.
Anyhow details about an import policy.
So, to sum up, no particular measures are needed for net/bitcoin(d) to
be 'safe'.
Does anyone have any more reflections regarding the creation of a
net/bitcoin port?
Also would anyone want to be a maintainer? Perhaps I would simply be
the maintainer.
Last, if anyone wants to give a hand getting the port files together
please let me know.
