Quote from: ShadowOfHarbringer on January 09, 2014, 02:08:18 PM

Quote from: Abdussamad on January 09, 2014, 01:42:21 PM

Quote from: ShadowOfHarbringer on January 09, 2014, 12:25:12 PM

Quote from: Abdussamad on January 09, 2014, 10:43:28 AM

Quote from: ShadowOfHarbringer on December 22, 2013, 08:23:07 PM

If it does not allow you to send without fee, probably very high risk of losing the coins exists.

This worries me. Not because I think there is any chance of loosing coins but because you don't know that there is no chance of loosing coins. Spend transactions are either mined into a block or not. If they are not being mined you can just stop broadcasting that transaction and mining pools will eventually forget about it and you can send those coins with a fee. How exactly is there a risk of "loosing" coins, then?

Ask the core Bitcoin developers. The code which asks you for a fee in that case has not been changed in my fork.

This fork is merely 3 lines of code which turn off a single limitation which forces you to pay a fee even when it is not absolutely necessary. That is not rocket science.

You seem to have misunderstood what I wrote. I just said that there is never a risk of loosing your coins just because you didn't pay enough of a fee. You just remove the transaction using pywallet and wait for the mining pools to forget it. Then you can redo the transaction again with a fee.

This is not what i referred to.
I refrerred to the part of your answer which stated that "it worries you that i don't know that there is no chance of losing coins".

Sure I don't know, because I have not studied the Bitcoin-QT code in detail - I didn't need that in order to create my fork.

Quote from: Abdussamad on January 09, 2014, 01:42:21 PM

If they are not being mined you can just stop broadcasting that transaction and mining pools will eventually forget about it and you can send those coins with a fee

Are you sure about that ? Won't some other nodes keep relaying the transaction so it will be forever stuck in a limbo ?
Is there a time limit for how long a transaction can be kept in memory before it becomes obsolete & is removed ?

[Citation needed] Actually i would like to see a citation (or a snippet of code) for that. I don't have time to study the whole code.

I don't have a citation for you. It was asked on this forum and I learned from that. nodes aren't fond of keeping around transactions that can't be mined because the fee is too small. The only reason it sticks around is because -qt keeps broadcasting it over and over again in vain. I can tell you that pywallet supports removing transactions from wallet.dat file for this very reason:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=35214.0