Quote from: Wolf0 on March 30, 2013, 10:10:36 PM

Quote from: maqifrnswa on March 30, 2013, 01:09:29 AM

Quote from: paraipan on March 29, 2013, 03:14:55 PM

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on March 29, 2013, 03:12:14 PM

So.... move too fast and we maybe introduce a forking bug or a security vulnerability.

Move too slow and maybe we get fired-- somebody faster at incorporating safe changes releases their own fork.

For me, "move slow" is the right answer.

But I would be completely happy contributing patches to somebody else running a fork who solves the "move fast but be safe" problem.

Ok, start a "Bitcoin-QT Poweruser" fork, and let people submit their heart's desire. Without you doing this it will have 0 credibility, including from me.

Edit: Hope you're not coming in from above just to go back again after you said only 2 words.

Why are you relying on your nanny-state oppressor to provide the fork you want when you can make one yourself and let people submit to their heart's desire? That is what is supposed to happen (see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=22434.0)

Galvin is gaining credibility amongst the community by not including every patch/feature people request.

Gavin is including very, very few patches and features people have requested. Even extremely well-tested ones, like coin control.

[Citation needed]

Also, he is probably frightened of breaking something. I know i would be in his situation.
We're talking hundereds millions of dollars, this is no joke.