On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Wladimir wrote:
> Consensus running through the comments in the pull is that it needs
> (auto)tests.
>
> Are you going to do this Luke? Or is anyone else working on this?
>
*crickets*
Anyone willing to give pull #1647 its final push by addressing the
comments,
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> There's a reason why luke-jr's pull request for CPfP remains open.
>
> There is general agreement that it appears to be useful. CPfP works
> to close the mismatch between how bitcoin transaction fees are
> attached by the sender, versus mod
There's a reason why luke-jr's pull request for CPfP remains open.
There is general agreement that it appears to be useful. CPfP works
to close the mismatch between how bitcoin transaction fees are
attached by the sender, versus modern economic situations where the
receiver is willing to pay a fee
On 01/18/2014 03:05 AM, Wladimir wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Odinn Cyberguerrilla
>
>
>
> regarding:
> stuff not getting into blockchain in a day's time,
> microdonations not facilitated as much as they could be,
>
> Please point to your pull requests improving the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
We rebroadcast incoming transactions without fees at several nodes,
including bc.info, to keep them in mempools.
On 01/17/2014 10:04 PM, Mark Friedenbach wrote:
> CPFP is *extremely* important. People have lost money because this
> feature is missing
clarification, I am not a doge dev. It was intended just as a joke, to
make you laugh.
regarding pull requests improving these issues I am under the impression
that the developers will take care of what needs to be taken care of in
that regard. Am presently in collaboration on a bitcoin project
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Odinn Cyberguerrilla <
odinn.cyberguerri...@riseup.net> wrote:
>
>
> regarding:
> stuff not getting into blockchain in a day's time,
> microdonations not facilitated as much as they could be,
>
Please point to your pull requests improving these issues.
If your o
regarding:
stuff not getting into blockchain in a day's time,
microdonations not facilitated as much as they could be,
that would be:
very bad
much news
such fail
Seriously, that would not be so good.
Hope I made you laugh a bit
> BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in upstream.
>
> I thi
On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:53:47 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
> BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in upstream.
>
> I think the main hurdle to merging was that various people disagreed
> on various edge case handling and implementation details, but no
> fundamental objections.
Heck, even I disagree
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
CPFP is *extremely* important. People have lost money because this
feature is missing. I think it's critical that it makes it into 0.9
If I get a low-priority donation from a blockchain.info wallet, that
money can disappear if it doesn't make it into
BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in upstream.
I think the main hurdle to merging was that various people disagreed
on various edge case handling and implementation details, but no
fundamental objections.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
> On Friday, January 17, 2014 11:44:09
On Friday, January 17, 2014 11:44:09 AM Wladimir wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/luke-jr
> >
> > These are pretty much all well-tested and stable for months now.
>
> #3242: Autoconf improvements needs rebase, and comment from
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/luke-jr
>
> These are pretty much all well-tested and stable for months now.
>
#3242: Autoconf improvements needs rebase, and comment from jgarzik and me
taken into account (about -enable-frontends=).
T
On Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:09:52 AM Wladimir wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> It has been way to long since last major release. Many improvements and new
> features have been added to master since, so we'd like to do a 0.9rc1
> release soon.
>
> The current aim is next month, February 2014.
>
> Of c
Just a small note of caution for those joining in testing.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3529
Currently the master branch has this issue where leveldb renames all of
.sst files to .ldb. This makes running the 0.8.x version of Bitcoin think
the index is corrupt. Until a fix is include
Hello all,
It has been way to long since last major release. Many improvements and new
features have been added to master since, so we'd like to do a 0.9rc1
release soon.
The current aim is next month, February 2014.
Of course there are still some open issues that need to be resolved before
rele
16 matches
Mail list logo
