The new direction is to do a snapshot of BBR blockchain and import that into the new codebase.
Isn't this simply known as a
hard fork in crypto currency space? Where you always have the potential problem that the old chain lives on?
Yes, but if you look at the history of other cryptocoins, the likelihood of such forks living on is quite low.
A centralized coinswap is much worse in this respect, IMHO. I'd certainly be wary of sending all my coins to a "trusted" party, and I'd seriously look into maintaining a "classic" version. In contrast, it is much easier to simply update your software and accept the fact that old clients are no longer compatible.
I am an outsider, and I don't know what is planned the "new" Boolberry of course, but I would also say to hard fork the blockchain as seamlessly as possible is "the way to go", and "they way it's done", and if it's done properly, people will keep faith and mostly migrate to the new chain.
I have a hunch that part of the problem might be a difficulty for the new daemon to read the serialized blockchain of the old daemon, so that you can't just switch at a given block height within a single program, but must orchestrate a "daemon switch" of sort as well. A fascinating problem, if true, that got me thinking and has my head spinning. I currently brainstorm that I would probably try to do this with
two hard forks...