From: "Martin Habovštiak" <martin.habovstiak@gmail•com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] New BIP: protocol for multisignature payments
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 15:14:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALkkCJY+EF7UsRxrkjz0L8-Y9EWGxOS3p8c1+0=c5fvcWwEfTw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP2xEEO5AzkiBW2PE9SrZ+xmCGHME_-z851Wn1Oqh_DKvw@mail.gmail.com>
Both wallet and server side implementations will be based on existing
code in me-friendly language (C++>Python>anything else). I don't have
a time for it right now but Crypto hackathon in Parallel Polis
(http://cryptohack.org/) seems like good opportunity for it. I will
let you know then.
2015-02-01 14:43 GMT+01:00 Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>:
> If you decide to implement this in an existing or new bitcoinj based wallet,
> then I'm happy to give you pointers on how to do it. Making one-off, cross
> platform app specific wallets is pretty easy these days. For 2-of-3 dispute
> mediation transactions they'd start out being kind of specialist so asking
> people to move money from their general spending wallet into dispute
> mediation app isn't unthinkable. Eventually general purpose wallets would
> integrate protocol, UI ideas and maybe code.
>
> At least, that's how I'd do it.
>
> On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Martin Habovštiak
> <martin.habovstiak@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>> I didn't consider that, thank you for feedback! I will try to find
>> some time for implementing it. I'll write again then.
>>
>> 2015-01-31 23:50 GMT+02:00 Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail•com>:
>> > I agree- standards should be descriptive ("here is how this thing I did
>> > works") and NOT proscriptive ("here's what I think will work, lets all
>> > try
>> > to do it this way.").
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I could look at implementing it someday, but now I'd like to receive
>> >>> feedback from community.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> IMO it's better to pair a protocol spec with an implementation.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > --
>> > Gavin Andresen
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-01 14:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-31 1:30 Martin Habovštiak
2015-01-31 17:19 ` Mike Hearn
2015-01-31 17:47 ` Martin Habovštiak
2015-01-31 18:07 ` Mike Hearn
2015-01-31 21:50 ` Gavin Andresen
2015-01-31 23:02 ` Martin Habovštiak
2015-02-01 13:43 ` Mike Hearn
2015-02-01 14:14 ` Martin Habovštiak [this message]
2015-01-31 2:10 Thomas Kerin
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='CALkkCJY+EF7UsRxrkjz0L8-Y9EWGxOS3p8c1+0=c5fvcWwEfTw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=martin.habovstiak@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=mike@plan99$(echo .)net \
/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