Re: [ANN] Spark | X11 | BTer/Bittrex/C-CEX | PoW/PoS | Exchanges | Roadmap |
...I've been digging a bit more though and its a bit peculiar, with my new daemon it will only sync on the 12750 chain and rejects PoS blocks from the other chain. If I set the conf file so it only connects to nodes on the 15000 blockchain and try resyncing it gets to block 10041 and then just rejects PoS blocks.
As I mentioned before, I'm a tinkerer not a coder, and I don't know the PoS stuff that well but from what I've seen so far I have a suspicion that the dev accidentally released two different versions of the daemon, if you look at this commit from around when the coin was launched there are a couple of key PoS changes made: https://github.com/RentaMouse/Spark/commit/71d360fdbb18aacf9c49179e0be882f0b9fac289 - the PoW endpoint in the PoS code is changed from 10000 to 14000, and the PoS key is changed. Pre-change daemons could have mined a PoS block after 10000, post change versions wouldnt accept it.
On GitHub there are actually two release versions, 1.0.0 and 1.1.0, looking at the peer info from my daemon there are a few nodes on 1.1.0 but none of those are on the 15k blockchain, which backs up my theory. I suspect Bittrex are running 1.1.0 because they would have compiled from Github and they added the coin later than most....
As I mentioned before, I'm a tinkerer not a coder, and I don't know the PoS stuff that well but from what I've seen so far I have a suspicion that the dev accidentally released two different versions of the daemon, if you look at this commit from around when the coin was launched there are a couple of key PoS changes made: https://github.com/RentaMouse/Spark/commit/71d360fdbb18aacf9c49179e0be882f0b9fac289 - the PoW endpoint in the PoS code is changed from 10000 to 14000, and the PoS key is changed. Pre-change daemons could have mined a PoS block after 10000, post change versions wouldnt accept it.
On GitHub there are actually two release versions, 1.0.0 and 1.1.0, looking at the peer info from my daemon there are a few nodes on 1.1.0 but none of those are on the 15k blockchain, which backs up my theory. I suspect Bittrex are running 1.1.0 because they would have compiled from Github and they added the coin later than most....
well, I remember earlz actually pointing at the very same two possible pitfalls in his review...
as we're after pow, part of is not needed anymore anyway. good you fixed that first
https://github.com/Earlz/coinreviews/blob/master/sparkcoin.txt
when you say, you could would be able to compile the wallet and release a binary, what architecture do you have in mind...?
if you go for windows, that'd be the one with the most demand i guess, we are at most there
however, later I should have some time to clone this and try getting it compiled with VS on another maschine...
'at most very superficial' would be the most adequate description of my experience on bitcoin-n-clones-code, so to speak...
...yet, seems to be a good time to change that.
Great work man, the investors of this coin are thankful. Hope we can get a dev in on this and have everything fixed and rolling soon. Try to sort it with trex before the others, at least ask their advice on how to move, at which block they halted trading etc
info is already there
...yep, thought the rex (without diminishing the other exchanges) was the first to investigate as they had the highest frequence and the tightest gap in orders, so presumably the highest demand... thus first thing to become set straigt 
yup, would be a real pitty to let that whole thing drown just because the old dev went lost (and I can vividly imagine him simply going: whow... such fork... very work to fix... many hates... such loose coins... I go... many not profit... whow!)
but apart from that dematerialized dev, guts told me that it won't require rocket science to get that thing going again...
and as of now, at least we're moving forward and chances are not bad to make a clean restart some time not too far in the future