Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-09-22 📝 Original message:On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-09-22
📝 Original message:On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Wladimir J. van der Laan via
bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> My long-term vision of bitcoind is a P2P node with validation and blockchain store, with a couple of data sources that can be subscribed to or pulled from.
I agree with this long term vision.
Here's how I think it could happen:
1) Libconsensus is completed and moved to a subtree (which has libsecp
as an internal subtree)
2) Bitcoind becomes a subtree of bitcoin-wallet (which has
bitcoin-wallet and bitcoin-qt)
Without aggressively changing it for this purpose, libconsensus should
tend to become C, like libsecp, which is better for proving
correctness.
Hopefully at some point it won't take much to move to C.
Upper layers should move to C++11
Don't focus on the git subtrees, the basic architecture is bitcoin-qt
on top of bitcoin-wallet, bitcoin-wallet on top of bitcoind (and
friends like bitcoin-cli and bitcoin-tx), bitcoind on top of
libconsensus on top of libsecp256k1.
I believe this would maximize the number of people who can safely
contribute to the project.
I also believe this is the architecture most contributors have in mind
for the long term, but I may be wrong about it.
Criticisms to this plan?
📝 Original message:On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Wladimir J. van der Laan via
bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> My long-term vision of bitcoind is a P2P node with validation and blockchain store, with a couple of data sources that can be subscribed to or pulled from.
I agree with this long term vision.
Here's how I think it could happen:
1) Libconsensus is completed and moved to a subtree (which has libsecp
as an internal subtree)
2) Bitcoind becomes a subtree of bitcoin-wallet (which has
bitcoin-wallet and bitcoin-qt)
Without aggressively changing it for this purpose, libconsensus should
tend to become C, like libsecp, which is better for proving
correctness.
Hopefully at some point it won't take much to move to C.
Upper layers should move to C++11
Don't focus on the git subtrees, the basic architecture is bitcoin-qt
on top of bitcoin-wallet, bitcoin-wallet on top of bitcoind (and
friends like bitcoin-cli and bitcoin-tx), bitcoind on top of
libconsensus on top of libsecp256k1.
I believe this would maximize the number of people who can safely
contribute to the project.
I also believe this is the architecture most contributors have in mind
for the long term, but I may be wrong about it.
Criticisms to this plan?