So it is something like a switch for a soft fork "x"? I mean like the switch I can turn on and off about RBF or about datacarriersize? It does not seem too terrible.
However having too many switches may become overwhelming to me (not to say to a normal user)
Soft forks are ok with me. Miners can choose any txs to mine anyway, and we already have a lot of types of txs (rbf on/off, op_return, inscription, multisig, taproot, legacy, etc).
The thing about another software in parallel to core looks a bit risky for me. I do not like lightning because lf that, more risks for bugs.
Because of all the above, I prefer to not do this. There are very good devs at core, the human factor/reputation is important.
So it is something like a switch for a soft fork "x"?
I mean like the switch I can turn on and off about RBF or about datacarriersize?
It does not seem too terrible.
However having too many switches may become overwhelming to me (not to say to a normal user)
Soft forks are ok with me. Miners can choose any txs to mine anyway, and we already have a lot of types of txs (rbf on/off, op_return, inscription, multisig, taproot, legacy, etc).
The thing about another software in parallel to core looks a bit risky for me. I do not like lightning because lf that, more risks for bugs.
Because of all the above, I prefer to not do this. There are very good devs at core, the human factor/reputation is important.