Pavol Rusnak [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2019-02-16 📝 Original message:On 15/02/2019 16:18, Luke ...
📅 Original date posted:2019-02-16
📝 Original message:On 15/02/2019 16:18, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> The proposed proof-file format provides a standard way of combining
>> multiple proofs and associated metadata. The specification of the format
>> is in the Protocol
>> Buffers<ref>https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/</ref>; format.
>
> IIRC, this has been contentious for its use in BIP70 and may hinder adoption.
Off-topic to main discussion of this thread. But I need to voice my opinion.
We've been using Protocol buffers in Trezor since the beginning and so
far it has proven to be as a great choice.
While I agree it is always risky to add an exotic dependency to a
software project, this one has lots of interoperable implementations in
all possible languages you can name and it's very easy to work with.
In the past, the Bitcoin dev community used the same arguments with
regards to PSBT and we ended up with something that is almost as complex
as protobuf, but it's de-facto proprietary to Bitcoin.
Cherry on top is that PSBT format can be easily translated back and
forth to PB making it even more obvious that PB should have been used in
the first place.
Now everyone ELSE needs to implement this proprietary format and this
actually hinders adoption, not using Protocol Buffers. If these were
used since the beginning, there would be much more PSBT usage already.
--
Best Regards / S pozdravom,
Pavol "stick" Rusnak
CTO, SatoshiLabs
📝 Original message:On 15/02/2019 16:18, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> The proposed proof-file format provides a standard way of combining
>> multiple proofs and associated metadata. The specification of the format
>> is in the Protocol
>> Buffers<ref>https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/</ref>; format.
>
> IIRC, this has been contentious for its use in BIP70 and may hinder adoption.
Off-topic to main discussion of this thread. But I need to voice my opinion.
We've been using Protocol buffers in Trezor since the beginning and so
far it has proven to be as a great choice.
While I agree it is always risky to add an exotic dependency to a
software project, this one has lots of interoperable implementations in
all possible languages you can name and it's very easy to work with.
In the past, the Bitcoin dev community used the same arguments with
regards to PSBT and we ended up with something that is almost as complex
as protobuf, but it's de-facto proprietary to Bitcoin.
Cherry on top is that PSBT format can be easily translated back and
forth to PB making it even more obvious that PB should have been used in
the first place.
Now everyone ELSE needs to implement this proprietary format and this
actually hinders adoption, not using Protocol Buffers. If these were
used since the beginning, there would be much more PSBT usage already.
--
Best Regards / S pozdravom,
Pavol "stick" Rusnak
CTO, SatoshiLabs