diff options
| author | instagibbs <gsanders87@gmail.com> | 2015-08-28 14:32:58 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Jorge Timón <jtimon@jtimon.cc> | 2015-11-07 20:05:57 +0100 |
| commit | d954832e3091d3fc61e5d30d14c06f042993134f (patch) | |
| tree | 1d67eee3062728fb7007a3c9da7998611b2c8464 /bip-0099.mediawiki | |
| parent | 6b201a4d2df77f7e186ccbd2c2719b5634a75f81 (diff) | |
Random grammar and spelling stuff
Diffstat (limited to 'bip-0099.mediawiki')
| -rw-r--r-- | bip-0099.mediawiki | 12 |
1 files changed, 6 insertions, 6 deletions
diff --git a/bip-0099.mediawiki b/bip-0099.mediawiki index f05247f..dd1e8bc 100644 --- a/bip-0099.mediawiki +++ b/bip-0099.mediawiki @@ -16,14 +16,14 @@ consensus forks and proposes a deployment mechanism for each of them. ==Motivation== The security assumptions of p2p consensus-based systems like Bitcoin are -not always well understood, and the upgrade mechanisms to the +not always well-understood, and the upgrade mechanisms to the consensus rules are a work in progress that may vary depending on the type of change being deployed. Discussing such changes without a uniform view on the deployment paths often leads to misunderstandings and unnecessarily delays the deployment of changes. -==Defintions== +==Definitions== - Software fork: in free software, an existing project can be copied and extended/maintained without permission from the original @@ -35,8 +35,8 @@ deployment of changes. bug in consensus validation reimplementations. - Softfork: an intentional consensus fork where everything that was previously invalid remains invalid, but some things that were - valid also become invalid. Majority of miners can impose - this kind of changes and they also have some deployment advantages. + valid also become invalid. A majority of miners can impose + these kind of changes and they also have some deployment advantages. - Hardfork: an intentional consensus fork that is not a softfork. ==Taxonomy of consensus forks== @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ that there's many alternative implementations of the protocol (forks of Bitcoin Core or written from scratch). But sometimes a bug in the reimplementaion of the consensus -validation rules can prevent alternative implementation users from +validation rules can prevent users of alternative implementation from following the longest (most work) valid chain. This can result in those users losing coins or being defrauded, making reimplementations of the consensus validation rules very risky. Note that a natural @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ which - being accidental - obviously doesn't need a deployment plan. ====11/12 March 2013 Chain Fork==== There is a precedent of an accidental consensus fork at height 225430. -Without entering in much detail (see [2]), the situation was different from +Without entering into much detail (see [2]), the situation was different from what's being described from the alternative implementation risks (today alternative implementation still usually rely in different degrees on Bitcoin Core trusted proxies, which is very reasonable considering the lack of a complete |