Melvin Carvalho [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-10-26 📝 Original message:On 26 October 2014 08:57, ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-10-26
📝 Original message:On 26 October 2014 08:57, Wladimir <laanwj at gmail.com> wrote:
> Now that headers-first is merged it would be good to do a 0.10 release
> soon. Not *too* soon as a major code change like that takes some time
> to pan out, but I'd like to propose the following:
>
> - November 18: split off 0.10 branch, translation message and feature
> freeze
> - December 1: release 10.0rc1, start Release Candidate cycle
>
> That leaves three weeks until the freeze. After the release and branch
> split-off, the RC cycle will run until no critical problems are found.
> For major releases this is usually more painful than for stable
> releases, but if we can keep to these dates I'd expect the final
> release no later than January 2015.
>
> Let's aim to have any pending development for 0.10 merged before
> November 18. Major work that I'm aware of is:
>
> - BIP62 (#5134, #5065)
> - Verification library (#5086, #5118, #5119)
> - Gitian descriptors overhaul, so that Gitian depends = Travis depends
> (#4727)
> - Autoprune (#4701)
> - Add "warmup mode" for RPC server (#5007)
> - Add unauthenticated HTTP REST interface (#2844)
>
Thanks for the update.
I was even unaware of of #2844 : 'The beginnings of a block explorer-style
API for bitcoind.'
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2844
Seems to me like an important piece of work, Im glad it's finally made the
cut.
Firstly, apologies in coming in late to the conversation. As I am also
working on a REST API for electronic coins. Some questions:
1. Is there a BIP, or some other doc (e.g. gist), outlining the REST output
e.g. the response format and MIME types. Or just compile from source?
2. How set in stone is v1 of the the going forward? PS I support @maaku's
comments re: "/api/v1/" -- tho I guess it is too late for that now.
3. Would there be any support to develop this interface into something that
would be W3C standards compliant, or reviewed by the REST community. So
for example a context can be provided to self document the terms (something
I've almost completed) and would allow standardization of block explorer
and bitcoind outputs. Right now every explorer seems to have a different
JSON output.
Great work! Looking forward to seeing this go live and how it devlops!
>
> Let me know if there is anything else you think is ready (and not too
> risky) to be in 0.10. You can help along the development process by
> participating in testing and reviewing of the mentioned pull requests,
> or just by testing master and reporting bugs and regressions.
>
> Note: I intended the 0.10 release to be much sooner. The reason that
> this didn't pan out is that I insisted on including headers-first, and
> this took longer than expected. There seems to be a preference to
> switch to a fixed (instead of feature-based) 6-month major release
> schedule, ie
>
> - July 2015: 0.11.0 (or whatever N+1 release is called)
> - January 2016: 0.12.0 (or whatever N+2 release is called)
> - July 2016: 0.13.0 (or whatever N+3 release is called)
>
> Wladimir
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141026/9b77e9de/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:On 26 October 2014 08:57, Wladimir <laanwj at gmail.com> wrote:
> Now that headers-first is merged it would be good to do a 0.10 release
> soon. Not *too* soon as a major code change like that takes some time
> to pan out, but I'd like to propose the following:
>
> - November 18: split off 0.10 branch, translation message and feature
> freeze
> - December 1: release 10.0rc1, start Release Candidate cycle
>
> That leaves three weeks until the freeze. After the release and branch
> split-off, the RC cycle will run until no critical problems are found.
> For major releases this is usually more painful than for stable
> releases, but if we can keep to these dates I'd expect the final
> release no later than January 2015.
>
> Let's aim to have any pending development for 0.10 merged before
> November 18. Major work that I'm aware of is:
>
> - BIP62 (#5134, #5065)
> - Verification library (#5086, #5118, #5119)
> - Gitian descriptors overhaul, so that Gitian depends = Travis depends
> (#4727)
> - Autoprune (#4701)
> - Add "warmup mode" for RPC server (#5007)
> - Add unauthenticated HTTP REST interface (#2844)
>
Thanks for the update.
I was even unaware of of #2844 : 'The beginnings of a block explorer-style
API for bitcoind.'
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2844
Seems to me like an important piece of work, Im glad it's finally made the
cut.
Firstly, apologies in coming in late to the conversation. As I am also
working on a REST API for electronic coins. Some questions:
1. Is there a BIP, or some other doc (e.g. gist), outlining the REST output
e.g. the response format and MIME types. Or just compile from source?
2. How set in stone is v1 of the the going forward? PS I support @maaku's
comments re: "/api/v1/" -- tho I guess it is too late for that now.
3. Would there be any support to develop this interface into something that
would be W3C standards compliant, or reviewed by the REST community. So
for example a context can be provided to self document the terms (something
I've almost completed) and would allow standardization of block explorer
and bitcoind outputs. Right now every explorer seems to have a different
JSON output.
Great work! Looking forward to seeing this go live and how it devlops!
>
> Let me know if there is anything else you think is ready (and not too
> risky) to be in 0.10. You can help along the development process by
> participating in testing and reviewing of the mentioned pull requests,
> or just by testing master and reporting bugs and regressions.
>
> Note: I intended the 0.10 release to be much sooner. The reason that
> this didn't pan out is that I insisted on including headers-first, and
> this took longer than expected. There seems to be a preference to
> switch to a fixed (instead of feature-based) 6-month major release
> schedule, ie
>
> - July 2015: 0.11.0 (or whatever N+1 release is called)
> - January 2016: 0.12.0 (or whatever N+2 release is called)
> - July 2016: 0.13.0 (or whatever N+3 release is called)
>
> Wladimir
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141026/9b77e9de/attachment.html>;