Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] NDL - The coin for Pastafarians - Flying Spaghetti Monster Cryptocurrency!
by
Chicago
on 14/11/2018, 05:46:37 UTC
What built in "fail safe?  What "up stream best practices"?

I'm concerned that you keep coming up with weird reasons we can't use my code, but you won't test those reasons. 

Its not like I changed 900 lines of code, added 67 lines with 3 new functions etc.  I just tweaked a widely accepted coin (litecoin) wallet to work with our coin.

I'm concerned you're just throwing out hypotheticals about what could go wrong and claiming that means we should scrap everything without even verifying if your concerns are relevant.

DNP raised a point I can't dismiss; he was concerned there wasn't enough time for testing.  Fine, fair enough, that's something we can talk about.  But you just suggest we should scrap everything and that doesn't make any sense. 

I tried for months to get someone to code for this wallet, DaveF tried a lot longer than I did.  Most coders want hundreds of dollars up front and will charge upwards of a couple thousand dollars by the time they're done.  But no one in this community was willing to pay (sans those who may have paid already).  Finally, I started working on it (without compensation) and after months of testing and troubleshooting and coding it, I finally did it.  Now you're saying we should scrap the thing we've been waiting for for upwards of a couple of years without even testing it because something you're afraid of "might" go wrong?  I find fault with your logic.

Hi number435398,

    Thanks for your candor.
    I am glad we're getting this all out in the open.

    I am sure if it were trivial to perform a non-disruptive protocol upgrade from 0.8 to 0.15 then everybody would be doing it.
    I've already seen one reckless attempt for this on another coin where a developer came and went and then left consensus in a broken state.
    Its true that after the BIPs activate, none of the 0.8 clients will be viable for mining or signing transactions which will require strict DER signatures.

    After studying the code for a year, I have simply arrived at a different conclusion then you have.
    The options I see moving forward include a 0.13.0 rebase with a hard fork to improve our difficulty adjustment algorithm.

    You can try to discuss actual elements of the code or features in the client, but simply calling my criticisms bullshit will not result in a better network.

Best Regards,
-Chicago