1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>) id 1XiMF5-00009E-IC
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 26 Oct 2014 11:44:15 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.215.52; envelope-from=melvincarvalho@gmail.com;
helo=mail-la0-f52.google.com;
Received: from mail-la0-f52.google.com ([209.85.215.52])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1XiMF4-0002o8-0U
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 26 Oct 2014 11:44:15 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f52.google.com with SMTP id hz20so4497919lab.39
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 26 Oct 2014 04:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.8.136 with SMTP id r8mr1967022laa.91.1414323846938; Sun,
26 Oct 2014 04:44:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.1.234 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Oct 2014 04:44:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJA3-qK71TcUCYQ3xOdi+zgE_fB9N6NJkNBUDtWnA-0dcA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+s+GJA3-qK71TcUCYQ3xOdi+zgE_fB9N6NJkNBUDtWnA-0dcA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 12:44:06 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhJfY+zhnzWBa76u+=o1jAsxG-+j5c6RYDS+nhSDi1QDQQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158ae547e8ac1050651eee4
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(melvincarvalho[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1XiMF4-0002o8-0U
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin Core 0.10 release schedule
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 11:44:15 -0000
--089e0158ae547e8ac1050651eee4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On 26 October 2014 08:57, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
> Now that headers-first is merged it would be good to do a 0.10 release
> soon. Not *too* soon as a major code change like that takes some time
> to pan out, but I'd like to propose the following:
>
> - November 18: split off 0.10 branch, translation message and feature
> freeze
> - December 1: release 10.0rc1, start Release Candidate cycle
>
> That leaves three weeks until the freeze. After the release and branch
> split-off, the RC cycle will run until no critical problems are found.
> For major releases this is usually more painful than for stable
> releases, but if we can keep to these dates I'd expect the final
> release no later than January 2015.
>
> Let's aim to have any pending development for 0.10 merged before
> November 18. Major work that I'm aware of is:
>
> - BIP62 (#5134, #5065)
> - Verification library (#5086, #5118, #5119)
> - Gitian descriptors overhaul, so that Gitian depends = Travis depends
> (#4727)
> - Autoprune (#4701)
> - Add "warmup mode" for RPC server (#5007)
> - Add unauthenticated HTTP REST interface (#2844)
>
Thanks for the update.
I was even unaware of of #2844 : 'The beginnings of a block explorer-style
API for bitcoind.'
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2844
Seems to me like an important piece of work, Im glad it's finally made the
cut.
Firstly, apologies in coming in late to the conversation. As I am also
working on a REST API for electronic coins. Some questions:
1. Is there a BIP, or some other doc (e.g. gist), outlining the REST output
e.g. the response format and MIME types. Or just compile from source?
2. How set in stone is v1 of the the going forward? PS I support @maaku's
comments re: "/api/v1/" -- tho I guess it is too late for that now.
3. Would there be any support to develop this interface into something that
would be W3C standards compliant, or reviewed by the REST community. So
for example a context can be provided to self document the terms (something
I've almost completed) and would allow standardization of block explorer
and bitcoind outputs. Right now every explorer seems to have a different
JSON output.
Great work! Looking forward to seeing this go live and how it devlops!
>
> Let me know if there is anything else you think is ready (and not too
> risky) to be in 0.10. You can help along the development process by
> participating in testing and reviewing of the mentioned pull requests,
> or just by testing master and reporting bugs and regressions.
>
> Note: I intended the 0.10 release to be much sooner. The reason that
> this didn't pan out is that I insisted on including headers-first, and
> this took longer than expected. There seems to be a preference to
> switch to a fixed (instead of feature-based) 6-month major release
> schedule, ie
>
> - July 2015: 0.11.0 (or whatever N+1 release is called)
> - January 2016: 0.12.0 (or whatever N+2 release is called)
> - July 2016: 0.13.0 (or whatever N+3 release is called)
>
> Wladimir
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
--089e0158ae547e8ac1050651eee4
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On 26 October 2014 08:57, Wladimir <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mai=
lto:laanwj@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">laanwj@gmail.com</a>></span> wro=
te:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;=
border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Now that headers-f=
irst is merged it would be good to do a 0.10 release<br>
soon. Not *too* soon as a major code change like that takes some time<br>
to pan out, but I'd like to propose the following:<br>
<br>
- November 18: split off 0.10 branch, translation message and feature freez=
e<br>
- December 1: release 10.0rc1, start Release Candidate cycle<br>
<br>
That leaves three weeks until the freeze. After the release and branch<br>
split-off, the RC cycle will run until no critical problems are found.<br>
For major releases this is usually more painful than for stable<br>
releases, but if we can keep to these dates I'd expect the final<br>
release no later than January 2015.<br>
<br>
Let's aim to have any pending development for 0.10 merged before<br>
November 18. Major work that I'm aware of is:<br>
<br>
- BIP62 (#5134, #5065)<br>
- Verification library (#5086, #5118, #5119)<br>
- Gitian descriptors overhaul, so that Gitian depends =3D Travis depends (#=
4727)<br>
- Autoprune (#4701)<br>
- Add "warmup mode" for RPC server (#5007)<br>
- Add unauthenticated HTTP REST interface (#2844)<br></blockquote><div><br>=
</div><div>Thanks for the update.<br><br></div><div>I was even unaware of o=
f #2844 : 'The beginnings of a block explorer-style API for bitcoind.&#=
39;<br><br><a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2844">https:/=
/github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2844</a><br><br></div><div>Seems to me lik=
e an important piece of work, Im glad it's finally made the cut.<br><br=
></div><div>Firstly, apologies in coming in late to the conversation.=C2=A0=
As I am also working on a REST API for electronic coins.=C2=A0 Some questi=
ons:<br></div><div><br>1. Is there a BIP, or some other doc (e.g. gist), ou=
tlining the REST output e.g. the response format and MIME types.=C2=A0 Or j=
ust compile from source?<br><br></div><div>2. How set in stone is v1 of the=
the going forward?=C2=A0 PS I support @maaku's comments re: "/api=
/v1/" -- tho I guess it is too late for that now.<br><br></div><div>3.=
Would there be any support to develop this interface into something that w=
ould be W3C standards compliant, or reviewed by the REST community.=C2=A0 S=
o for example a context can be provided to self document the terms (somethi=
ng I've almost completed) and would allow standardization of block expl=
orer and bitcoind outputs.=C2=A0 Right now every explorer seems to have a d=
ifferent JSON output.<br><br></div><div>Great work!=C2=A0 Looking forward t=
o seeing this go live and how it devlops!<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockq=
uote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1p=
x solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Let me know if there is anything else you think is ready (and not too<br>
risky) to be in 0.10. You can help along the development process by<br>
participating in testing and reviewing of the mentioned pull requests,<br>
or just by testing master and reporting bugs and regressions.<br>
<br>
Note: I intended the 0.10 release to be much sooner. The reason that<br>
this didn't pan out is that I insisted on including headers-first, and<=
br>
this took longer than expected. There seems to be a preference to<br>
switch to a fixed (instead of feature-based) 6-month major release<br>
schedule, ie<br>
<br>
- July 2015: 0.11.0 (or whatever N+1 release is called)<br>
- January 2016: 0.12.0 (or whatever N+2 release is called)<br>
- July 2016: 0.13.0 (or whatever N+3 release is called)<br>
<br>
Wladimir<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-develo=
pment@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development=
" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de=
velopment</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>
--089e0158ae547e8ac1050651eee4--
|
