Retroactive alternative to v0.8.4

in steem •  2 years ago

Steemit has released version v0.8.4. That release is identical to v0.8.3 (which does not have retroactive changes to curation rewards) except that it has some politically-neutral bug fixes. I think it is only fair for the version of the client with the retroactive curation reward changes (currently v0.8.2) to be upgraded to benefit from those bug fixes as well.

Steemit has not done so. But I am willing to make the small code changes necessary to release a version of steemd that maintains the retroactive curation reward changes of v0.8.2 but includes the latest bug fixes in v0.8.4. I call this version v0.8.104. The idea is that v0.8.004 and v0.8.104 are identical except that the first one with the 0 has the non-retroactive curation reward while the second one with the 1 has the retroactive curation reward.

Personally, I, as a witness, would rather stay on v0.8.4 (non-retroactive) unless it seems like the super-majority of witnesses are going to go with an alternative version just prior to the July 4th deadline. In that case, I will go with the will of the majority. However, I want to provide the v0.8.104 option so that there is a fair vote by the community. The retroactive option should not be hindered because of bugs that have already been fixed (even if the bugs aren't super critical or devastating to the network if they were to persist with v0.8.2 past the July 4th deadline).

There is one little issue. @abit reminded me of the license for the Steem code, which states:

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
...
5. The software is not used with any forks of the Steem blockchain that are not recognized by Steemit, Inc in writing.

There is debate whether the changes I propose with v0.8.104 would count as a violation of condition 5 or not. But I rather play it safe and get explicit permission from @ned that I can go ahead with my proposed modifications and tag a v0.5.104 release on my GitHub page.

If I get that explicit confirmation from @ned as a comment to this post, I will update this post to include a link to that v0.8.104 release.


Edit:
Okay, I got the explicit approval from @ned, so I pushed the code to my GitHub. You can find it here: https://github.com/arhag/steem/commits/v0.8.104

Any witnesses who want to continue voting for retroactive changes now have the option to upgrade from v0.8.2 to v0.8.104 (https://github.com/arhag/steem/commits/v0.8.104) to take advantage of the latest bug fixes without compromising retroactivity.

Keep in mind that v0.8.2, v0.8.3, v0.8.4, and v0.8.104 are all mutually incompatible. Anyone using a different version than the super majority after July 4th 00:00:00 UTC will go on a fork.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Thank you @arhag!
I switched to this version, because I don't agree with the conclusions by steemit regarding the payout data.

I went through the list for everyone at < -1 SP, and identified 52 active accounts known to me as individual user. Those have a total of -2100 SP.
Then I compared the activity of the winners of 104 to the big stakeholders (pages of transactions on steemd.com). It's obvious that they didn't do a fraction of the curation work of them. The only reason they get that much is their incredibly high stake, which wasn't really hard to achieve. Even if small curators invested thousands of dollars and powered up, they see only neglegible returns because of the unproportional bias.

I will keep 004 in the background to switch over if the majority decides so, but only under heavy protest.

You can find the new release v0.8.104 (v0.8.2 retroactive + bugfix) here: https://github.com/arhag/steem/commits/v0.8.104

That was quick @arhag thanks very much for your efforts !!!

Due to time constraints they can simply vote with 082.

·

They could. But if retroactive were to pass (which admittedly seems less and less likely as more witnesses upgrade to v0.8.4), it would be nice if we didn't need yet another hard fork to fix the witness voting bug.

And as you know, the change is very minimal. I already have it ready to push. Just need the go ahead from Steemit.

·
·

Arhag Im OK with the release.

·
·

I have indications that a couple of witnesses are voting v0.8.2 but have updated to v0.8.4 because they feeled forced to do it since on the github repo it's sais for the v0.8.4:

"All witnesses must upgrade by July 4th."

and the same is not stated for the other versions like v0.8.2 (retroactive),
and nowhere is stated that the network would survive without the bug fix (because the bug fix is not so critical as admitted on slack channel)

So a summary:
Much witnesses updated (or will) to v0.8.4(non retroactive from genesis) because they feel now forced to do it, not because they really not prefer v0.8.2 (retroactive from genesis)

PS of course it is much better you give us the option for a release v0.8.104 (v0.8.2 +bug fix retroactive from genesis) I hope we have it soon enough so witnesses figure out what to do IN TIME) Thanks for your efforts!

You have my vote.

I think it is only fair for the version of the client with the retroactive curation reward changes (currently v0.8.2) to be upgraded to benefit from those bug fixes as well.
Steemit has not done so.

I guess I know why... (and I hope that's not the reason)
I asked ned yesterday on slack which version he is supporting...
I must admit his answer deeply disappointed me...
You can see why on this great analysis here https://steemit.com/steem/@arhag/analysis-of-curation-reward-difference-between-v0-8-2-and-v0-8-3

And I get the opportunity here to ask @dan the same question:
which version are you supporting? v0.8.2 or v0.8.3 ?

i wish dev team have a simple version!