From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 20:41:13 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CANEZrP2hbBVGqytmXR1rAcVama4ONnR586Se-Ch=dsxOzy2O4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<201404232032.08740.luke@dashjr.org> <53582426.4030601@gk2.sk>
In-Reply-To: <53582426.4030601@gk2.sk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201404232041.14664.luke@dashjr.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] New BIP32 structure
Precedence: list

On Wednesday, April 23, 2014 8:35:50 PM Pavol Rusnak wrote:
> On 04/23/2014 10:32 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > f) I missed the part where BIP 32 redefined "account" to mean "subwallet"
> > instead of what has traditionally been called "account" in Bitcoin.
> 
> Ah, okay. The last time I saw Bitcoin-qt it was still using independent
> addresses.

It is. Accounts have been a bitcoind feature since before 0.4.

> > In that case, single-subwallet wallet software probably needs to have the
> > user provide a subwallet number in addition to the seed.
> 
> Which brings us back to my original complaint that the user can be
> confused because he doesn't see all his funds.

I don't see how. The user knows he has money in different subwallets. As long 
as he has a way to specify which subwallet he is accessing in single-subwallet 
clients, there shouldn't be a problem.

Luke