📅 Original date posted:2014-06-24
📝 Original message:> The question is; what does this buy us, and is it worth the potentially huge
> amount of time it could take? My gut feeling is we have bigger fish to fry.
> There's plenty of work to do just on the core consensus code, making Bitcoin
> Core into a competitive wallet as well would be an additional burden.
I don't intend to work on that myself but that's up to the people that
want to contribute to that. Once it's a separate project it could
either be a big success, or it could slowly wither away. It can have a
release cycle separate from the node. Likely faster.
The organizational reason to split off the wallet is to get rid of
that responsibility (and code) from the bitcoind repo. Maintaining a
wallet should not be part of maintaining the core infrastructure. But
just deleting it would be unreasonable.
> However I may be quite biased, as I am the maintainer of what is primarily a wallet library :)
Hah. I've thought about that migration path as well.
>From my experience the main thing people are missing with BitcoinJ is
a quick and easy way to set up a wallet as a daemon, to use the
functionality from non-java through RPC.
But there are other interesting upcoming wallet projects as well, for
example CoinVault.
Wladimir
Wladimir [ARCHIVE] /
npub1xq…ymc2p
2023-06-07 15:23:13
in reply to nevent1q…mw89
Author Public Key
npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2pPublished at
2023-06-07 15:23:13Event JSON
{
"id": "63f0087cacdff767d4ae756a28b3ebf85a8379270245276bd8d3ed9712e9ba10",
"pubkey": "30217b018a47b99ed4c20399b44b02f70ec4f58ed77a2814a563fa28322ef722",
"created_at": 1686151393,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"70c0fbbfb361e1a5e33121959a54368ef9bf960fb4424bf0b260b1c5f505777b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"915174f2a57f6972af50ff21311eee6841578dbf9a7b3b4d4d2a7ad65b3f9911",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-06-24\n📝 Original message:\u003e The question is; what does this buy us, and is it worth the potentially huge\n\u003e amount of time it could take? My gut feeling is we have bigger fish to fry.\n\u003e There's plenty of work to do just on the core consensus code, making Bitcoin\n\u003e Core into a competitive wallet as well would be an additional burden.\n\nI don't intend to work on that myself but that's up to the people that\nwant to contribute to that. Once it's a separate project it could\neither be a big success, or it could slowly wither away. It can have a\nrelease cycle separate from the node. Likely faster.\n\nThe organizational reason to split off the wallet is to get rid of\nthat responsibility (and code) from the bitcoind repo. Maintaining a\nwallet should not be part of maintaining the core infrastructure. But\njust deleting it would be unreasonable.\n\n\u003e However I may be quite biased, as I am the maintainer of what is primarily a wallet library :)\n\nHah. I've thought about that migration path as well.\n\n\u003eFrom my experience the main thing people are missing with BitcoinJ is\na quick and easy way to set up a wallet as a daemon, to use the\nfunctionality from non-java through RPC.\n\nBut there are other interesting upcoming wallet projects as well, for\nexample CoinVault.\n\nWladimir",
"sig": "4f20e3e00a535c0892de937c48f73b6a4cd0aa759f7ffcd5f931ae7829d407aacfd918cc66f9a95d59f8abe514af96b4d7306663a464cde073a82b9e3f9c631d"
}