MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+w+GKR1BNpVk4SAKExrkGDMzb+BQfinpmWGbNiMyM89DnzOFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <55C9BA0F.60408@jonasschnelli.ch>
	<CA+w+GKR1BNpVk4SAKExrkGDMzb+BQfinpmWGbNiMyM89DnzOFA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:51:31 +0530
Message-ID: <CAFkt3UPaEu5uxeLD0kUDK9xDhA8szy29F1U7HaSzj0ScOt1LsQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Sriram Karra <karra.etc@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <hearn@vinumeris.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bfcefead8c9d7051d074d9d
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Future Of Bitcoin-Cores Wallet
Precedence: list

--047d7bfcefead8c9d7051d074d9d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Hey Jonas,
>
> I think your analysis of what (some) users need is a good one.
>
> We've discussed this before so I know you prefer your current approach,
> but I personally would take a slightly different path to reach the same end:
>
>    1. Support serving of SPV wallets from pruned storage. This means some
>    protocol upgrades, BIPs, etc. It helps all SPV wallets, including on phones.
>    2. Then make a bitcoinj based desktop wallet app, that contains a
>    bundled bitcoind.
>
> It makes a lot of sense to have single set of reference implementations
for the different components. So unless you also support something you have
not explicitly stated - get rid of bitcoin-qt in its current form, the
above does not meet the spirit of Jonas' original post - which makes a load
of sense to me.

--047d7bfcefead8c9d7051d074d9d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br>On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Mike Hearn via bitcoi=
n-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfounda=
tion.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</=
span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #cc=
c solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Hey Jonas,<div><br></div><div>I =
think your analysis of what (some) users need is a good one.</div><div><br>=
</div><div>We&#39;ve discussed this before so I know you prefer your curren=
t approach, but I personally would take a slightly different path to reach =
the same end:</div><div><ol><li>Support serving of SPV wallets from pruned =
storage. This means some protocol upgrades, BIPs, etc. It helps all SPV wal=
lets, including on phones.</li><li>Then make a bitcoinj based desktop walle=
t app, that contains a bundled bitcoind.</li></ol></div></div></blockquote>=
<div>It makes a lot of sense to have single set of reference implementation=
s for the different components. So unless you also support something you ha=
ve not explicitly stated - get rid of bitcoin-qt in its current form, the a=
bove does not meet the spirit of Jonas&#39; original post - which makes a l=
oad of sense to me.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div></div></div></div>

--047d7bfcefead8c9d7051d074d9d--