Change references from BTC Core to LTC Core (#373)
In this commit, all references to `Bitcoin` or `Bitcoin Core` are replaced with `Litecoin` and `Litecoin Core`, respectively.
In addition, I added a copyright line for *The Litecoin Core Developers* and provided the rightful attribution to the original `Bitcoin Core` team as per their MIT license.
0.15
Gerald Nash⚡️7 years agocommitted byAdrian Gallagher
The Bitcoin Core project operates an open contributor model where anyone is
The Litecoin Core project operates an open contributor model where anyone is
welcome to contribute towards development in the form of peer review, testing
and patches. This document explains the practical process and guidelines for
contributing.
@ -157,11 +157,10 @@ where possible keep them short, uncomplex and easy to verify.
@@ -157,11 +157,10 @@ where possible keep them short, uncomplex and easy to verify.
"Decision Making" Process
-------------------------
The following applies to code changes to the Bitcoin Core project (and related
projects such as libsecp256k1), and is not to be confused with overall Bitcoin
The following applies to code changes to the Litecoin Core project, and is not to be confused with overall Litecoin
Network Protocol consensus changes.
Whether a pull request is merged into Bitcoin Core rests with the project merge
Whether a pull request is merged into Litecoin Core rests with the project merge
maintainers and ultimately the project lead.
Maintainers will take into consideration if a patch is in line with the general
@ -179,7 +178,7 @@ In general, all pull requests must:
@@ -179,7 +178,7 @@ In general, all pull requests must:
- Where bugs are fixed, where possible, there should be unit tests
demonstrating the bug and also proving the fix. This helps prevent regression.
Patches that change Bitcoin consensus rules are considerably more involved than
Patches that change Litecoin consensus rules are considerably more involved than
normal because they affect the entire ecosystem and so must be preceded by
extensive mailing list discussions and have a numbered BIP. While each case will
be different, one should be prepared to expend more time and effort than for
@ -220,7 +219,7 @@ higher in terms of discussion and peer review requirements, keeping in mind that
@@ -220,7 +219,7 @@ higher in terms of discussion and peer review requirements, keeping in mind that
mistakes could be very costly to the wider community. This includes refactoring
of consensus critical code.
Where a patch set proposes to change the Bitcoin consensus, it must have been
Where a patch set proposes to change the Litecoin consensus, it must have been
discussed extensively on the mailing list and IRC, be accompanied by a widely
discussed BIP and have a generally widely perceived technical consensus of being
a worthwhile change based on the judgement of the maintainers.