Does GCC preclude a soft fork to handle timestamp overflow?

Josh Doman raised concerns regarding a proposal that might not align well with traditional softfork definitions, highlighting how it could potentially compromise the security of older network participants. He pointed out the vulnerability to DOS attacks and the detrimental impact on Bitcoin's locktime functionality, which could leave the cryptocurrency significantly impaired. This approach does not address the timestamp issue effectively.

Doman also references a longstanding assumption within the Bitcoin community that suggests normative unwrapping behavior could be adopted well before the year 2106. This would ensure compatibility up until that point, after which software that hasn't been updated would simply become inoperative without posing significant risks. This perspective suggests a preference for a solution that maintains functionality and security throughout transitions, contrasting with approaches that could lead to vulnerabilities or reduced functionality.