From: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@monetize•io>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Plans to separate wallet from core
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:15:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAC1+kJOQ2uBo2peYKZJyPSQL6qzk6Yu-cF-tPs3GzVS6cAc53w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJDVBQVu8yH9jLu_rQmk=dsJuMUctT-iK0zzOJRYgE8k9w@mail.gmail.com>
On 6/23/14, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail•com> wrote:
> It's least surprising if the wallet works as a SPV client by default.
> Then, users can use it without first setting up a core. Thus the idea
> would be to use P2P primarily.
So first bitcoind will support SPV mode then we separate the wallet?
Are the core and the wallet share any code (say, the p2p messages via
a sub-repo or something)?
> There could be a mode to use a trusted core by RPC for
> mempool/conflicted transaction validation and such. But I'm not sure
> about this - as we've seen, pure-SPV wallets work pretty well. If you
> want it to act as an edge router you can point a SPV wallet at your
> trusted core as well.
I thought we would first separate wallet from core (maintaining the
full-node wallet status) and then implement an optional SPV mode for
the core (and transitively for "qt-wallet", which would support both
full and SPV mode).
> There are no plans for adding Electrum-like functionality to bitcoind.
> There is already Electrum. Let's not reinvent any wheels.
I'm sorry, but I still don't know what Electrum has to do with all this.
Bitcoin companies often like to interface with the network via
bitcoind nodes, what's wrong with their custom wallets consuming some
optional indexes from a bitcoind node their run themselves?
I'm not proposing a "bitcoind-client" similar to a electrum-client. I
thought it was assumed you where still going to run both the core and
the wallet and we just wanted to separate the code for better
modularity. Seriously, Mike also said something about Electrum too and
I'm really lost about what you people mean here.
> It does not need to keep a full chain database. But it needs its own
> record of the chain, headers-only + what concerns the keys in the
> wallet.
Why cannot consume that data from a bitcoind node that always run alongside it?
I still don't get the plan but it feels like it won't look as DRY as I
was expecting...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-23 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-23 9:50 Jorge Timón
2014-06-23 10:32 ` Wladimir
2014-06-23 20:15 ` Jorge Timón [this message]
2014-06-24 9:07 ` Wladimir
2014-06-24 9:44 ` Wladimir
2014-06-24 13:24 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-06-24 15:33 ` Justus Ranvier
2014-06-24 16:40 ` Jorge Timón
2014-06-25 5:43 ` Wladimir
2014-06-24 9:11 ` Mike Hearn
2014-06-24 9:40 ` Wladimir
2014-06-24 10:12 ` Mike Hearn
2014-06-24 11:29 ` Jorge Timón
2014-06-24 11:48 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-06-24 13:26 ` Jorge Timón
2014-06-24 13:37 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-06-24 11:58 ` Wladimir
2014-06-24 12:16 ` Mike Hearn
2014-06-24 12:41 ` Wladimir
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAC1+kJOQ2uBo2peYKZJyPSQL6qzk6Yu-cF-tPs3GzVS6cAc53w@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jtimon@monetize$(echo .)io \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=laanwj@gmail$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox