I am running into issues too .. Could the documentation be incorrect?
The github docs state
Buy BTC for XCP
order --from=mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns --get-quantity=10 --get-asset=BTC
--give-quantity=20 --give-asset=XCP --expiration=10 --fee_provided=.001
However when attempting to do a buy using the format above the following exception is thrown :
File "C:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\counterpartyd.py", line 426, in
raise exceptions.FeeError('When buying BTC, do not specify a fee provided.')
lib.exceptions.FeeError: When buying BTC, do not specify a fee provided.
Yes: the
README had
fee_provided and
fee_required reversed. Good catch.
Normally I prefer to a project where the developers have fair rewards to keep them working hard. In the description of this project, I cannot see any way the developers can be rewarded other than burning some BTC themselves. Therefore, I think there're three options:
1) they have burnt or will burn considerable amount of BTC so they will get quite a lot of XCP to enjoy the future appreciation. In this case, could the developers provide some evidence of burning to show their confidence in this project?
2) they reserved some part of XCP for themselves. This is fine as long as they make it public how much they reserved, but I haven't seen any claim in the original post.
3) they have no rewards at all. In this case, I am not so comfortable because I don't see why the developers will keep working on this project after their interest is gone. This project will become a completely community-driven project and will not survive long.
Could any developer of Counterparty help clarify on this? Thanks.
Both xnova and I are burning some BTC. No XCP have been reserved for any person or organisation.
'tried to transfert XCP.
Problem before the expected problem:
user@home:~$ xcp send --from=send --from=myaddresswithXCP --quantity=1 --asset=XCP --to=safeBTCaddress
Confirm? (y/N) y
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/user/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/counterpartyd.py", line 426, in
json_print(bitcoin.transmit(unsigned_tx_hex))
File "/home/user/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/bitcoin.py", line 260, in transmit
return rpc('sendrawtransaction', [signed_tx_hex])
File "/home/user/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/bitcoin.py", line 64, in rpc
raise exceptions.BitcoindError('{}'.format(error))
lib.exceptions.BitcoindError: {'code': -22, 'message': 'TX rejected'}
Same error without the --from=send
I expected the command to work,
but then never see the XCP arrive in my safeaddress 'coz even Eligius doesn't process OP_RETURN before v0.9.
So I kind of willingly risked to lose 1XCP, but fail.
(curious: does anyone know an easy way to cancel a transmission that has never been confirmed? be BTC, XCP or whatever)
Did anyone succeed using the send command?
Must have someone who tried before Eligius stopped, or on testnet.
What do I do wrong?
edit: tried to add -paytxfee=0.0001 (error: unrecognized arguments)
Code improvement needed: 'doesn't show BTC balance
? ? ?xcp address myXCPaddresswithBTC
Balances
+-------+------------+
| Asset | Amount |
+-------+------------+
| BTC | ??? |
| XCP | okvalue |
+-------+------------+
Without Eligius, no one can send XCP on mainnet yet. You can on testnet, however.
Bitcoind isn't actually capable of showing the BTC balance of an arbitrary address, so, for the time being at least, neither is counterpartyd.