The programmers who made 0.8 didn't consider this forking scenario. This platitude is thus entirely without merit
Pipe down, I am sure the developers thought long and hard about ways that 0.8 might cause a fork. One slipped through, because accidents happen.
That was my point actually. I was not accusing the developers of negligence I was saying that his platitudes are a form of "I could have done it better then them if I was them and could see the future". Well, he isn't them and they didn't see the future.
someone could start a fork the same way as just happened. Do you see? It's the all part that makes us reject your proposal B in the short term. Neither A nor B is workable as of now. Block generators are advised to use 0.7 or earlier. As long as most do, we (probably) avoid this kind of a fork.
If the network ditches 0.7 then there is no problem.
As long as the network is predominantly 0.7 this would result in you creating a single orphaned block rather then a fork. While certainly a waste, this could happen while using 0.7 to mine as well (for a different reason).