📅 Original date posted:2016-08-18
📝 Original message:Hi
> I have some experience with hardware wallet development and its
> integration and I know it's a mess. But it is too early to define such
> rigid standards yet. Also, TREZOR concept (device as a server and the
> primary source of workflow management) goes directly against your
> proposal of wallet software as an workflow manager. So it is clear NACK
> for me.
The current question – as already mentioned – is we ACK to work together
on a signing protocol or if we NACK this before we even have started.
I'm not saying that the draft proposal I made is the way to go, I'm
happy to NACK it myself in favor of a better proposal.
I strongly recommend to work together on a standard that will have one
central winner: the end user.
</jonas>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160818/343d9d28/attachment.sig>;
Jonas Schnelli [ARCHIVE] /
npub1nf…3dtxs
2023-06-07 17:52:52
in reply to nevent1q…a783
Author Public Key
npub1nfrrurat393mqymf3s26pujyn5vujlem3pzcukr5p9d4qpklngxq43dtxsPublished at
2023-06-07 17:52:52Event JSON
{
"id": "b79de27670bc73398024ef3a4ee8f5dc65317c9293d2a3e41d7f3999fb31dc7f",
"pubkey": "9a463e0fab8963b013698c15a0f2449d19c97f3b88458e5874095b5006df9a0c",
"created_at": 1686160372,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6e7f7cb2c3110cb7289a3abd667304a3b4e6f9ba4e2581c492d7b93c214a5ea1",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"04cb83671979f018bf0a23988f409166c92e8055f0a2132a843fab40883c5448",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"32c1d9c27dfd0e394e66612d9d585c61a027adc8ad69aeb89a4a5f455080448c"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-08-18\n📝 Original message:Hi\n\n\u003e I have some experience with hardware wallet development and its\n\u003e integration and I know it's a mess. But it is too early to define such\n\u003e rigid standards yet. Also, TREZOR concept (device as a server and the\n\u003e primary source of workflow management) goes directly against your\n\u003e proposal of wallet software as an workflow manager. So it is clear NACK\n\u003e for me.\n\nThe current question – as already mentioned – is we ACK to work together\non a signing protocol or if we NACK this before we even have started.\n\nI'm not saying that the draft proposal I made is the way to go, I'm\nhappy to NACK it myself in favor of a better proposal.\n\nI strongly recommend to work together on a standard that will have one\ncentral winner: the end user.\n\n\u003c/jonas\u003e\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 819 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160818/343d9d28/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "4e5231b77b4bc751c72a68af340edb71950cbaebe64db90a30b0d48b1d635fcf6d8ec2965b4735ff0b32e579a1abd623e8d9e921972a67e643cfe0b68493531b"
}