MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 11:50:00 +0200
Message-ID: <CAC1+kJNjcPkaHiR8mzofwXE4+4UX5nmxX5Q3rZv37v-K40p1Tw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@monetize.io>
To: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Plans to separate wallet from core
Precedence: list

I know there are plans to separate the wallet from the core code and I
think it's a great idea that will result in cleaner and more modular
software.
But it seems like my assumptions on how this would be done may be incorrect=
.

I was assuming that the wallet would consume data from a trusted
bitcoind core node using rpc or a better interface like an http rest
api (see PR #2844).
So the core would take care of the hard consensus stuff, and the
wallet would maintain its own database with private keys, addresses,
balances, etc. and would consume some data contained in bitcoind's
database.
I also assumed that the interface between wallet and core would
include queries to the UTXO (see PR #4351) and maybe TXO (see PR
#3652) for getting the historic balances.

As said, I'm not sure these assumptions are true anymore so I ask.
Is this the plan?
Is the plan that the wallet will use the p2p directly and maintain its
own chain database?

Well, it's something that generally interests me so if anyone can
detail the steps for separating the wallet a little bit, maybe I can
help with some of the steps.

Maybe there's no roadway yet. In that case I would like to advance
that discussion in this thread.

--=20
Jorge Tim=C3=B3n