Stefan Thomas [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2012-03-03 📝 Original message:Since several independent ...

📅 Original date posted:2012-03-03
📝 Original message:Since several independent clients (I know at least libcoin
<https://github.com/ceptacle/libcoin/blob/master/src/coinHTTP/RequestHandler.cpp>;
and BitcoinJS
<https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-server/tree/master/lib/rpc>;) aim
to implement JSON-RPC APIs which are either a superset of the original
client's or have at least some compatible functions, I think you can
make a case for including JSON-RPC API calls within the domain of BIPs.

In this instance the BIP aims to create a common protocol between
different clients, miners, mining proxies and pools. That's a lot of
software, so standardization definitely seems like a good idea and I
can't think of a reason not to use the BIP process.

I have some comments on the content of the BIP, but since this thread is
more of a meta-discussion I'll wait until the BIP is officially proposed.


On 3/2/2012 7:51 PM, Amir Taaki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I got sent this BIP:
>
> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_DRAFT:_getmemorypool#JSON-RPC_Method:_getmemorypool
>
> What is your opinion on this? Is it BIP related?
>
> It is a implementation-specific non-bitcoin-protocol proposal. My
> understanding of BIPs is that
> they apply across bitcoin implementations and largely focus on the
> most generic use-cases
> (like the URIs) and the protocol. Things which affect all clients, and
> allow the system to function
> as a united whole.
>
> That BIPs especially focus on the protocol, and that something like
> this is outside the mandate
> of the BIP process.
>
> For instance, we could imagine a future scenario. Bitcoin-Qt is
> currently based off bitcoind's
> codebase. However wumpus built the client in mind with an abstraction
> layer to enable multiple
> backends (a good design). In our hypothetical situation, there are 3
> different backend codebases
> using Bitcoin-Qt. I do not think a proposal to mandate a changing to
> Bitcoin-Qt's abstraction
> layer or a change in the UI placement would be appropriate BIP material.
>
> OTOH, many clients do need to make use of URIs and the BIP process is
> totally correct, as it
> standardises a behaviour which is needed for interoperability of the
> network and community.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Virtualization& Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
> Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
> also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20120303/f86175ef/attachment.html>;