Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
	designates 74.125.82.179 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=74.125.82.179; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
	helo=mail-we0-f179.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAD=_8RRU8UAqOUZeawe=XVfT91YtWmVGwDzW+KfkWYj649aZbw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.167053.1376954386.4583.bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
	<1377120278.34996.YahooMailNeo@web124501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<6e1e64615be421f47a74bcc427a13485@astutium.com>
	<CAD=_8RRU8UAqOUZeawe=XVfT91YtWmVGwDzW+KfkWYj649aZbw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 09:18:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0OF8bnrBhETbfMcL8gYTqHqP5zbVT8vZN1gbkGbymOQFQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
To: Maciej Trebacz <maciej@bitalo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from
	bitcoind
Precedence: list

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:36 AM, Maciej Trebacz <maciej@bitalo.com> wrote:
> Will removing "getwork" from the client impact the "setgenerate" RPC call?
> I.e. would you still be able to generate coins on testnet-in-a-box this way,
> or would you need a dedicated miner for that? testnet-in-a-box is very
> useful for testing and easy to setup, it would be great if it stays that way

Yes, that is currently being discussed in a separate pull request.  My
pull request does not impact setgenerate, but an added proposal does
remove the internal miner completely.

-- 
Jeff Garzik
Senior Software Engineer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc.      https://bitpay.com/