Quote from: d5000 on July 20, 2017, 10:04:30 PM

What I am really hoping - I know, most probably wishful thinking - is that Core and the NYA guys/miners/businesses sit down and negotiate a "better" hardfork.

One way or another, the whole debate has pushed up the perception of how much effort a hard fork takes to get over the line.

This is good or bad, depending on your view of how discerning people can be about hard forks.

Does accepting a hard fork to fix a minor bug increase the chances that a hard fork that increased the maximum number of bitcoins would be accepted?

Near the start of the debate, there was a suggestion to try a non-controversial hard fork first before trying the block size one as a bit of a test run. That would show that it can be done, at least for low controversy.

Quote

This "Hardfork wishlist" seems a bit outdated. Does someone know a better one?

Some of those can be achieved with segwit or are already solved.