Newsletters: add 84 (2020-02-12) #337
Conversation
| or none of it. | ||
|
|
||
| - [BOLTs #684][] updates [BOLT7][] to suggest that nodes send their own | ||
| generated announcements even when the remote peer requests a filter |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe s/filter/time-based filter/
| generated announcements even when the remote peer requests a filter | ||
| that would suppress that announcement. This can help ensure that a | ||
| node gets announced to the network without significantly reducing the | ||
| overall savings in CPU and bandwidth provided by filtering. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
perhaps: "provided by filtering gossip messages of peers where propagation seems adequate."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That makes the sentence very long, and I'm not sure it's exactly what Dave is trying to communicate. I do think this sentence could be clarified a little though - ".. reducing the overall savings ..." is reducing a reduction, which is a slightly confusing thing to be talking about.
|
|
||
| | Use | Don't use | Notes | | ||
| |-|-|-| | ||
| | anti fee sniping | anti-fee sniping, anti-fee-sniping | | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fwiw git grepping "anti-fee" and "fee-snip" returns quite a few of both
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, which is why I decided to choose a particular version. Really, all the alternatives here seem awful to me, so feel free to let me know if you prefer a different version (or, better yet, can think of a clever new term that could credibly gain adoption if we use it repeatedly).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm, as you've surely done, I looked online and in the codebase and see "fee sniping" and "anti-fee-sniping". I actually like the term and it seems to date back to at least 2015. I come to the same conclusion that you do, e.g. hyphenless, or alternatively use the two that we see.
|
Verified the links at the bottom are 🆗 |
jnewbery
left a comment
jnewbery
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Couple of nits inline. Otherwise looks great. Carl's PR description also LGTM.
| generated announcements even when the remote peer requests a filter | ||
| that would suppress that announcement. This can help ensure that a | ||
| node gets announced to the network without significantly reducing the | ||
| overall savings in CPU and bandwidth provided by filtering. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That makes the sentence very long, and I'm not sure it's exactly what Dave is trying to communicate. I do think this sentence could be clarified a little though - ".. reducing the overall savings ..." is reducing a reduction, which is a slightly confusing thing to be talking about.
harding
force-pushed
the
2020-02-12-newsletter
branch
from
6f64c11 to
85adf14
Compare
|
Pushed edits for feedback (thanks!). Also made slight edits to @dongcarl's text (spelling[1], fixing my old broken link to the wrong PR, and adding a link to a previous newsletter with some anchor text) and re-did the commit so it credits him as author instead of me (required a force push). [1] Per style guidelines, used American English spelling in line with this document's primary author (me) using that spelling. Just mentioning this so that Carl and John know they're free to insert those extra |
|
@bitschmidty just prior to merge time, could you please check https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.19.1/ to see if RC2 has been uploaded? If so, could you please also |
|
@harding Will do! |
|
ACK 85adf14 |
1 similar comment
|
ACK 85adf14 |
bitschmidty
force-pushed
the
2020-02-12-newsletter
branch
from
85adf14 to
02acde3
Compare
bitschmidty
force-pushed
the
2020-02-12-newsletter
branch
from
02acde3 to
ffe48f7
Compare
|
Split the style guide change into its own commit and squashed |
…- first complete draft ready for review
…/bitcoinops.github.io into german-translation-2025-01-17 Merge remote changes while preserving local German translation Synchronize local and remote branches while keeping the complete German translation of newsletter bitcoinops#337
7 participants
Bitcoin Core #17578