Quote from: coins101 on February 04, 2016, 09:07:47 AM

Happy to take a look at the IP issue and give you some informal feedback / personal view.

Thanks for the help =). This is my current situation:

I'm mostly concerned about how to properly deal with license headers and wording on the repo, to make it clear the new code is MIT and mine and the old code is GPL3 and ATI's.

This is the original license: https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/master/LICENSE

This is the modified one on my fork: https://github.com/goatpig/BitcoinArmory/blob/dev/LICENSE

Is this acceptable?

Also, this is what the license header looks like on the original code: https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/master/cppForSwig/BlockUtils.cpp#L1

I have modified some of that code already by did not modify the license text on any of the original code files.

This is the header on all new code files: https://github.com/goatpig/BitcoinArmory/blob/dev/cppForSwig/BlockDataMap.cpp#L1

Those files are 90~95% new code, I've copied some of the original utility code into the new class.

Did I mess up anything?

Quote from: STRML on February 04, 2016, 03:33:13 PM

We at BitMEX would be happy to help with resources and hosting. Please email us at support at bitmex dot com if you would like any help. We have plenty of extra capacity.

As for releases and documentation I heartily recommend doing releases on GitHub itself, and creating a gh-pages branch of the repository (or another repo) for docs/public website. That way we all benefit from open development of the docs site. I find in practice that if the repo is discoverable (e.g. there should be links to the GitHub page all over it), the community will submit PRs regularly. This makes keeping documentation helpful and up to date far easier.

Very sorry to hear how 0.94 went. As a team we're happy to help any way we can. Thank you for taking the lead on getting the work started to create a libre 0.94.

That's a kind offer and I appreciate it. While this is an important matter, I'd like to get back to it once I actually have code ready for a release. I will have an easier time doing things properly once I have a new version ready.

I am open to suggestions on this matter, although I think the GitHub release is a seller.

The gh-pages approach sounds really good too. I'll try to figure something out, I'm looking forward to the community submitting PRs.