On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Tamas Blummer <ta...@bitsofproof.com> wrote: > I see the huge amount of sweat and love that went into core and it actually > hurts to see that most is expended in friction and lack of a vision for the > software architecture. > > To be concrete, this was my plan if dealing with the Core code base: > > 1) I'd consider the separation of networking and storage as suggested for a > future extended libconsensus low priority, as their design should be (are) > dominated by the need of the consensus logic only. > > 2) create an API to the consensus+networking+storage service that is not at > the C++ language level but some scaleable cross-platform remoting, like eg. > ZeroMQ. > This API should be minimal and simple, assuming that one fully trusts the > node answering it. This API would unlock user land development by distinct > teams with diverse technologies.
I plan to replicate the RPC API (or a subset of it) using ZMQ's req/rep pattern, but #6103 comes first. > 3) move the wallet, QT and RPC and other backward compatibility stuff (if > e.g. there is some mining support) in-top of the new API and into distinct > source code repositories. Well, the RPC is the API. For libconsensus, its C API is the API. We've been talking about separating the wallet and qt to a different repository for long, but modularization is a prerequisite. _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
