Message-ID: <552AF35C.7060407@msgilligan.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 15:36:12 -0700
From: Sean Gilligan <sean@msgilligan.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
	rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>, 
	Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
References: <CAPg+sBjNkzqTUupx5QYZ_uzMwAdY4qRc+PGR5R9qCKUxxcHx7g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBjNkzqTUupx5QYZ_uzMwAdY4qRc+PGR5R9qCKUxxcHx7g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="------------040503030007050105080107"
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Deprecating Bitcoin Core's
 regtest-specific `setgenerate` behaviour
Precedence: list

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040503030007050105080107
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I would recommend adding the new method and deprecating (as in warning
against using) the old one for one major release. Then removing it
altogether in the following major release.

I have written a Java RPC client and Groovy/Spock functional tests
<https://github.com/msgilligan/bitcoin-spock> that use the current call.
A separate `generate` or `generateblocks` call is a great idea.

However, I try to keep my tests compatible with the current stable and
unstable versions of Bitcoin Core (and the Omni Core fork) and would
have to write code that checks the RPC server version (or checks for the
presence of the new call, falling back to the old one) to support the
use cases that I need to support. Not a huge deal, but I'm probably not
the only one.

-- Sean


On 4/12/15 7:26 AM, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Bitcoin Core's `setgenerate` RPC call has had a special meaning for
> -regtest (namely instantaneously mining a number of blocks, instead of
> starting a background CPU miner).
>
> We're planning to deprecate that overloaded behaviour, and replace it
> with a separate RPC call `generate`. Is there any software or user who
> would need compatibility with the old behaviour? We're generally very
> conservative in changing RPC behaviour, but as this is not related to
> any production functionality, we may as well just switch it.
>
> Note that the bitcoin.org <http://bitcoin.org> developer documentation
> will need to be updated.
>
> -- 
> Pieter
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT
> Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard
> Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises
> http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_
> source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=VA_SF
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


--------------040503030007050105080107
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">I would recommend adding the new method
      and deprecating (as in warning against using) the old one for one
      major release. Then removing it altogether in the following major
      release.<br>
      <br>
      I have written a Java RPC client and Groovy/Spock functional tests
      <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://github.com/msgilligan/bitcoin-spock">&lt;https://github.com/msgilligan/bitcoin-spock&gt;</a> that use the
      current call. A separate `generate` or `generateblocks` call is a
      great idea.<br>
      <br>
      However, I try to keep my tests compatible with the current stable
      and unstable versions of Bitcoin Core (and the Omni Core fork) and
      would have to write code that checks the RPC server version (or
      checks for the presence of the new call, falling back to the old
      one) to support the use cases that I need to support. Not a huge
      deal, but I'm probably not the only one.<br>
      <br>
      -- Sean<br>
      <br>
      <br>
      On 4/12/15 7:26 AM, Pieter Wuille wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAPg+sBjNkzqTUupx5QYZ_uzMwAdY4qRc+PGR5R9qCKUxxcHx7g@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>
          <div>
            <div>Hello everyone,<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            Bitcoin Core's `setgenerate` RPC call has had a special
            meaning for -regtest (namely instantaneously mining a number
            of blocks, instead of starting a background CPU miner).<br>
            <br>
            We're planning to deprecate that overloaded behaviour, and
            replace it with a separate RPC call `generate`. Is there any
            software or user who would need compatibility with the old
            behaviour? We're generally very conservative in changing RPC
            behaviour, but as this is not related to any production
            functionality, we may as well just switch it.<br>
            <br>
          </div>
          Note that the <a moz-do-not-send="true"
            href="http://bitcoin.org">bitcoin.org</a> developer
          documentation will need to be updated.<br>
          <br>
          -- <br>
        </div>
        Pieter<br>
        <br>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT
Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard
Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual">http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual</a>- event?utm_
source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=VA_SF</pre>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------040503030007050105080107--