This discussion is quite bikesheddy, but (or thus? :) ) I will put in my
2c.
The main thing to think about, I think, is "what would be best for the
users". To that end, I suggest the following:
* I do think a page on bitcoin.org listing relatively major, and
relatively vetted, clients is a good i
> I wouldn't expect any really important features which don't have
> complicated compromises attached to them to be omitted from all
> clients for all that long.
True, it's those compromises that people should base their decision on.
To make that easier was the motivation for me to suggest feature
Just my two cents -- I'm against removing the overview page or moving it to
the wiki. I think other open source clients deserve a mention on the
bitcoin.org page.
Many new people are looking for a good Android client, for example. Rather
than randomly searching on Google or the app store, it's muc
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Alan Reiner wrote:
> What a feature matrix is good at though is it allows you to very quickly
> find the specific feature or general criteria you're looking for without
> reading through all of the text. So it might be a useful addition maybe
> not on Bitcoin.org,
On 07/09/2012 10:36 PM, Stefan Thomas wrote:
It looks like that because feature matrices aren't especially helpful
for newbies to make a decision, especially when the "features" in
question were often things like how they handled the block chain or
which protocol standards they support, ie, thing
> I think by "users" you mean, geeks who understand wiki syntax.
The point is to expand the circle of contributors. I'm pretty sure there
are more people who can edit a wiki than people who know HTML and how to
create a git pull request. :)
> Inability to agree on columns isn't why the page look
By that time in the future, when there are many clients, there should just be a
flat list or no list at all.
- Original Message -
From: Nils Schneider
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc:
Sent: Monday, July 9, 2012 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Random order
> I strongly agree, but this is *why* I suggested moving it to the wiki. I
> recently had to choose an XMPP client and I looked on xmpp.org - after a
> frustrating experience with their listing [1]
Probably because their listing is even more useless than any of the
proposals that were presented he
> However that starts the project down the road of being dominated by
> our internal politics rather than what actually makes sense from the
> end users perspective.
I strongly agree, but this is *why* I suggested moving it to the wiki. I
recently had to choose an XMPP client and I looked on xmpp
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> If you had authored this as a pull request rather than making the
> change unilaterally I would have recommended leaving it so the
> reference client was always first. I also would have suggested that it
> use JS randomization instead of je
Although I can only speak for my involvement with MultiBit, the idea of a
randomised client page seems wrong to me, for the reasons given by Alan
earlier.
Equally, in order to further the idea that Bitcoin is more than the
reference client, it is appropriate that other clients are acknowledged and
I was originaly for the idea of randomization. Because it is the most
"fair", but "fair" is a relative term. It's fair for client developers who
argue over whose client should be first, and whose is better for various
purposes. But it's not fair for users, to have an inconsistent page, that
som
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jim wrote:
> RE: The position randomisation - I have to admit I was secretly pleased
> with the original layout, as MultiBit just happened to have the "eye
> candy" position of "top and centre". It is only fair to have them
> switch around.
This ordering wasn't ac
I think we are all so familiar with Bitcoin that we forget how daunting
and confusing it all is to new users. The clients page does a good job
in explaining that there are various pieces of software that they (the
new user) can use with their bitcoins.
It also helps with the question "Who can I tr
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Amir Taaki wrote:
> The only thing that's changed between now and this morning is:
>
> - Addition of Bitcoin Wallet for Android
> - Randomisation of entries
Yes, because I reverted eight commits to it by you because they were
clearly controversial, including the pr
It's easy to say, this page is controversial, so let's get rid of it.
However that starts the project down the road of being dominated by
our internal politics rather than what actually makes sense from the
end users perspective. That route spells doom for any product. You can
always tell when a U
400
> Von: Alan Reiner
> An: Gregory Maxwell
> CC: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
>
> Betreff: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Random order for clients page
> I generally agree with Greg. I don't see anything he's said or done as
> anti-alt-clien
y, July 9, 2012 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Random order for clients page
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Amir Taaki wrote:
> JS randomisation is bad. People shouldn't need JS to view a webpage.
JS randomization doesn't imply needing JS to view the page. It implies
needing
I don't think that's a good idea as it can easily confuse or annoy users
when things move around. The ordering should be preserved as much as
possible so users can remember where they found a client they liked
(e.g. 2nd row, 1st column and screenshot with light and blue colors).
Making them search
I generally agree with Greg. I don't see anything he's said or done as
anti-alt-client.
As an alt-client developer, I'm happy to see my client on the main page,
but I'm also happy if that "clients" page is simply an acknowledgement that
there's more to the Bitcoin world than just the Bitcoin-Qt
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Amir Taaki wrote:
> JS randomisation is bad. People shouldn't need JS to view a webpage.
JS randomization doesn't imply needing JS to view the page. It implies
needing JS to see it in random order. You could also combine it with
the server-side randomization if y
FWIW, all this argumenting is why my original suggestion for a Clients list
focussed on objective information in alphabetical order.
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Stefan Thomas wrote:
> As a user I don't want to
> be recommended a random client but the most sensible choice.
> ... wiki page ...
I think this is indeed a controversal topic. I just want to add the
remark, that it would make sense to have the wiki page *and* this
: Amir Taaki
> Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
>
> Sent: Monday, July 9, 2012 5:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Random order for clients page
>
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Amir Taaki wrote:
>> Took me a while, but
-development] Random order for clients page
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Amir Taaki wrote:
> Took me a while, but finally got it working.
> Entries on the clients page are randomly ordered when the page is generated.
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/commit/6850fc8c83494d6ec415ea9
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Amir Taaki wrote:
> Took me a while, but finally got it working.
> Entries on the clients page are randomly ordered when the page is generated.
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/commit/6850fc8c83494d6ec415ea9d36fb98366373cc03
> We should regenerate the page
Took me a while, but finally got it working.
Entries on the clients page are randomly ordered when the page is generated.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/commit/6850fc8c83494d6ec415ea9d36fb98366373cc03
We should regenerate the page every 2 days. This gives fair exposure to all the
client
27 matches
Mail list logo
