John Smith [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2011-09-11 🗒️ Summary of this message: Alex suggests ...
📅 Original date posted:2011-09-11
🗒️ Summary of this message: Alex suggests listing potential issues with implementing qt. John needs substantial evidence of testing before acknowledging a pull request. Bitcoin-qt may be released as experimental.
📝 Original message:Alex,
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Alex Waters <ampedal at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey John,
>
> It could be as simple as listing some things that you think could possibly
> break if qt is implemented. For example, "check the UI for artifacts". I
> don't really know what could potentially need to be tested, so any help
> would get things processed faster.
>
> I can't acknowledge a pull unless there is substantial evidence that it's
> been tested, especially something of this size...
>
It has been under development for a long time, the thread on the bitcointalk
forum is "substantial evidence" that many people are using it (also, I
receive quite a lot of mail about it, and the number of followers on github
steadily fluctuates around ~30). So nothing obvious is broken, at least, I
think has worked better than the Wx UI for quite a while.
But as I've said before I'm fine with keeping bitcoin-qt as a parallel,
experimental, release for a while. I think that's the only way to get more
testing with people that don't want to or can't build from source (could
just mark the download as "New GUI, experimental" or so...).
To be honest I think it should be merged at least as experimental ASAP, it
would save a lot of GUI complaints on the forum about things I've
implemented months ago already. However I will only put up a pull request as
soon as it is clear that it will actually be integrated. It is too much work
for me to keep the pull request up-to-date if it lingers for months like
many others have.
JS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20110911/a4fa11c6/attachment.html>;
🗒️ Summary of this message: Alex suggests listing potential issues with implementing qt. John needs substantial evidence of testing before acknowledging a pull request. Bitcoin-qt may be released as experimental.
📝 Original message:Alex,
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Alex Waters <ampedal at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey John,
>
> It could be as simple as listing some things that you think could possibly
> break if qt is implemented. For example, "check the UI for artifacts". I
> don't really know what could potentially need to be tested, so any help
> would get things processed faster.
>
> I can't acknowledge a pull unless there is substantial evidence that it's
> been tested, especially something of this size...
>
It has been under development for a long time, the thread on the bitcointalk
forum is "substantial evidence" that many people are using it (also, I
receive quite a lot of mail about it, and the number of followers on github
steadily fluctuates around ~30). So nothing obvious is broken, at least, I
think has worked better than the Wx UI for quite a while.
But as I've said before I'm fine with keeping bitcoin-qt as a parallel,
experimental, release for a while. I think that's the only way to get more
testing with people that don't want to or can't build from source (could
just mark the download as "New GUI, experimental" or so...).
To be honest I think it should be merged at least as experimental ASAP, it
would save a lot of GUI complaints on the forum about things I've
implemented months ago already. However I will only put up a pull request as
soon as it is clear that it will actually be integrated. It is too much work
for me to keep the pull request up-to-date if it lingers for months like
many others have.
JS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20110911/a4fa11c6/attachment.html>;