Quote from: gnarl on February 12, 2015, 03:23:26 AM

Quote from: BitBaydev on February 11, 2015, 10:56:31 PM

Quote from: gnarl on February 11, 2015, 07:06:55 PM

Hi Bitbaydev,

Well at least you respond like you care, but I mostly see hand-waving and explanations. No change in procedure.
Its too bad, this looks really cool and promising, but there are just too many GIANT RED FLAGS.

You just "released" another build as a reaction to one reported issue.
You built and released it in less than 7 hours since I posted, there is no way it was tested thoroughly.
You put it behind bitly, so no one knows where it is coming from, and Bitbay.market is an abandoned blog...

There is no hash or proof it is even bitbay code, and no one is standing by it and saying they built it.
This build is a different size , again. (first 48mb, then 45mb, now 25mb... what was removed?)
Chrome wont download it. Virustotal results have changed, now warnings come from clam-av heuristics.
https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/60fcc150cf64ed90660366ff8f5dcf85500d81e19622bb90f6ca859e8896fade/analysis/
The details show it was built on a different system than the last 2, who built this one?

Come on... This is not how you release quality software. Especially software that holds money.
Its releases like this that kill coins. I have seen it happen multiple times here. It ticks me off...
I would like to see this go mainstream, it has a great foundation, but sketchy stuff like this can kill it.

If you guys need help testing and releasing a product professionally, I can be bribed with beer and bitcoins.
Seriously. Fresh install testing, multiple os's, new user experience, beta testing, secure release procedures...
My problem reporting and recommendations are much more pleasant if I am properly beered and bribed.

Either way, I will wait until its available on github and released with someones reputation backing it.
Twitter that when it happens!
Good luck.

Hey gnarl, good to see you are fully paying attention, that is exactly the kind of involvement we are hoping for. As explained in the previous post, getting the good ship Bay sailing again has not been simple and we still have a way to go before we get there. So, a few things need explaining as there is a good measure of assumption in your posts. We did not "release" a new build, we released one. And rest assured, us posting it was not at all a reaction to your post. This is something that has been worked on for weeks, and if you check our twitter you will see a hint at this from well before your post. There is no way in hell we were going to be able to design a new UI, get it loaded up into a QT, compile and test all the way from windows XP to 8.1 (which we have done), as well as set up 3 static vps nodes, get command line clients working on them and have QTs use them, all in 7h.

So, your assumption that all of this was caused by your post is we're afraid, incorrect. We have the original dev that worked on the early BitBay wallets doing this, as well as other members of the community. It is all being posted to Github and we'll be linking to that shortly. The newly released wallet is the only one we will support as it is the only one we can say we control fully.

We put the link behind bit.ly for convenience and tracking, mainly as a way to keep on top of how many downloads we have. It simply links to http://bitbay.market/clients/bitbay-qt-win.zip. bitbay.market is not an abandoned blog, it is a website that has not been started yet. We've had our hands full and I myself decided to prioritise QTs as I felt it is important to have stable, working clients for everyone before we do any proper promo.

Now, you seem interested in helping us with release cycles, and to that we can only say, bring it on. I suggest you join us on slack and get to know the new team. You will find it is composed of people who bought into Bay early, and still believe in the concept and want to see it happen, just like you. We also have a bot that gives out unlimited virtual beer. You can PM us on here and we'll get you on.

Hey bitcoindev,
Timing sure made it look like a rushed build fix to me. If you planned and released it like this on purpose, my bad.

I still stand by what I have tried to politely point out here.
The 2 different sized builds available previously still appear sketchy. Trying to distance yourself from them now (in bold above) appears really sketchy.
Releasing a build through an obfuscated link, to a website that is not even started, without source code or hash, appears really sketchy.
Twittering to the world to get this build, before the website is done or even a tech support faq is available, appears really sketchy.
Secluding any tech support or bug reporting in an invite-only support forum, that is not searchable or usable by normal users, appears really sketchy.
Seeing all your responses actively defending these rushed and unsafe release procedures appears really sketchy.

If you cannot take the time to finish the website, provide a support faq, stand behind each build and release it safely, and work with the users openly, Why should anyone trust the software with their money?

I guess everyone will just have to wait and see if your promises about github are true.
If that occurs, I guarantee more people will support this project. Myself included.
Until then, it just appears too darn sketchy...

We've been planning this for a while, your post was a complete coincidence in timing but we through it a fantastic chance to engage with you and as you say, all you have done is to politely point out some very valid points.

We cannot fully support previous wallets because, we did not build them and do not control them. We were not part of BitBay when they were made. We decided to release because it is important for people to have access to updated wallets. We did so without a website because waiting for the website would mean delaying wallets, not something anybody gains from at the moment. Support FAQs will be up soon, and again, we are here, on BCT, on Twitter, on FB to answer to anybody that has a problem. So we are not in a situation of 'no support' at all, we are simply working on better channels for it. We are not secluding anything to our Slack, you were invited to it because it is where the active Bay community hangs out, so it is the most direct (and pleasant) way to get in touch. You are completely in your right to decline this invitation, nobody ever said it was the only way through which you'd get support (just currently the best one).

Once again I would like to make the point that none of these procedures have been done in a rushed or careless fashion. The fact that you have not heard from Bay on BCT is not to be construed as us not being very busy putting this project back on track.

Now about promises of github - here you go: https://github.com/oxidian/BitBay

This is the source to the new QT client. Clone away, look about, and by all means if you want to get involved in dev let us know.

There is nothing 'sketchy' about the team now running this project. Yes there was at the start, as everybody knows, this was a complete mess that ended in one of the biggest FUDstorms ever. It is only natural that all of you on here need to be reassured, and we will keep doing that until we achieve your trust.