|
Question to the folks who've been testing 0.93 the most: what are your biggest remaining concerns with this release? If I told you I was going to release the software after fixing the tx export problem (which will be in a .6 release in the next 24 hours), what would you complain about the most? No version of Armory is perfect, and at some point we have to say "pencils down", as long as there's no security or major usability issues.
I'm welcome to take feedback from anyone, but in particular I'm inviting:
helgabutters, TimS, zombieslayer9099, justusranvier, bitpop, and Carlton Banks
My apologies if you have been participating actively and I missed your name: I haven't been following this thread too closely myself, and I just picked out names at a glance that had multiple feedback posts. Ideally, I'd at least get a few thoughts back from everyone who has been involved in this the last few weeks.
(EDIT: OSX doesn't count... I'm hoping OSX is relatively stable, but at this point we can't dump too much more in terms of resources into it for the 0.93 release)
|
|
|
|
Armory's startup time is lower than I can ever remember it being before.
Yep, truly impressive, even when loading a supernode from an HDD. I noticed this little symbol in the lower left corner of the transaction window. When I hover over it, it expands and tells me where I am in the list. Is this meant to be just a debug thing that should be taken out before final release of 0.93?   Heh, we've been debating this widget forever. I'm not a big fan of its placement, but it is intended to be a permanent fixture. The idea is that for huge wallet histories, you can use that widget to go to any point in the history (we've been testing with 1VayNert and it definitely helps get through the 10,000 pages of tx history). You can click on the block or time to manually type/select where you want to go. Or just click "Top". Glad to hear the positive feedback about the changes. We knew this was going to be a rough testing round given how much has changed under the hood, but it does appear to be wrapping up nicely, and I think 0.93 really is a huge step forward for Armory, especially as an option for exchanges and webservices that need a strong API to the network. Okay, a contest. Extra 2 bounties for the winner! Wtf do we do with the paging control widget? Since writing the above message, we have spent even more time debating this. The problem stems from the fact that - If it's placed on the tableview itself, it obstructs things (or at least, it annoys me), and the user may not want/need it - If it's placed outside the tableview, then the dialog must have extra space to put it. Not a problem for the main window, but it will need to be placed for the wallet address ledger and the lockbox ledger. Both those dialogs are short on space. Obviously we want it to be available for those that need it, and it shouldn't be a easter-egg... it should be easily accessible for users that want it (i.e. we don't want to have a feature then get emails asking for us to implement it because they don't realize it's there). One option is to leave it where it is, but add a setting to allow the user to disable/hide it. That's probably the easiest to implement, and not a bad choice. I'll give an extra two bounties to whoever provides and idea that we like enough to implement. If you have a transaction history of 1,000,000 rows, spanning multiple years, how would you like to navigate that history? And if you switch the filter to a wallet that has only one page of history, what happens to that control? Should it be hidden, moved, or left where it is? Should it be totally user configurable. Ideally, whatever it is can be non-intrusive enough to have visible all the time and not inconvenience users that have small transaction histories and/or don't need the fancy controls. |
|
|
|
Armory's startup time is lower than I can ever remember it being before.
Yep, truly impressive, even when loading a supernode from an HDD. I noticed this little symbol in the lower left corner of the transaction window. When I hover over it, it expands and tells me where I am in the list. Is this meant to be just a debug thing that should be taken out before final release of 0.93? Heh, we've been debating this widget forever. I'm not a big fan of its placement, but it is intended to be a permanent fixture. The idea is that for huge wallet histories, you can use that widget to go to any point in the history (we've been testing with 1VayNert and it definitely helps get through the 10,000 pages of tx history). You can click on the block or time to manually type/select where you want to go. Or just click "Top". Glad to hear the positive feedback about the changes. We knew this was going to be a rough testing round given how much has changed under the hood, but it does appear to be wrapping up nicely, and I think 0.93 really is a huge step forward for Armory, especially as an option for exchanges and webservices that need a strong API to the network. |
|
|
|
Just pushed .5 . It should return the OSX build to it's previously mostly-stable state, and includes a new ledger paging mechanism. We normally wouldn't have made such a late change, but there was some issues with the old paging, and goatpig had already finished this, so we merged it in. If you have a large transaction history, please try it out! It follows the pattern of the infiniscroll websites such as imgur or facebook. The more you scroll, the more it loads! As usual, please get from the Secure Downloader if possible. Armory 0.92.99.5-testing for Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8+ (32- and 64-bit) Armory 0.92.99.5-testing for MacOSX 10.7+ (64bit) Armory 0.92.99.5-testing for Ubuntu 12.04+ (32bit) Armory 0.92.99.5-testing for Ubuntu 12.04+ (64bit) Armory 0.92.99.5-testing for RaspberryPi (armhf) Armory 0.92.99.5-testing Offline Bundle for Ubuntu 12.04 exact (32bit) Armory 0.92.99.5-testing Offline Bundle for Ubuntu 12.04 exact (64bit) Armory 0.92.99.5-testing Offline Bundle for RaspberryPi (armhf) Armory 0.92.99.5-testing: Signed hashes of all installers |
|
|
|
Will we ever get to spend unconfirmed inputs?
You technically already can... If they are from yourself :-) We added a command line arg after the malleability issues that does the opposite... It makes ALL unconfirmed unspendable even if they came from yourself. It would probably not be hard to switch it to make them spendable instead, but we won't be adding that to any official releases. If you're interested, search for IGNOREZC in the codebase (maybe IGNORE_ZC) |
|
|
|
That's intended behavior. How would you suggest dealing with it otherwise? We don't store any tx data in the wallet, so there's no way to save the tx-received time between loads. The best we can do is simply give it the first confirming block time. |
|
|
|
Okay, most of the team here has now upgraded to Core 0.10, which was a blind spot in our radar for the last couple test releases. To be fair, we did get it working with 0.10 (and hence why 0.92.99.2 worked), but it apparently broke unnoticed in that other update. A special thanks to goatpig who's been busting his ass getting all this new blockdatamanager (BDM) stuff in order, with the new databases, etc. It's been rocky, but these things always are, and he's been very quick to respond and handled the technicals like a boss! Thanks goatpig! I have uploaded .4 to S3, and also pushed the "v0.92.99.4-testing" signed tag. Hopefully we're finally nearing a releasable state. As always, please use the secure downloader, but here's the links just in case: Armory 0.92.99.4-testing for Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8+ (32- and 64-bit) Armory 0.92.99.4-testing for MacOSX 10.7+ (64bit) Armory 0.92.99.4-testing for Ubuntu 12.04+ (32bit) Armory 0.92.99.4-testing for Ubuntu 12.04+ (64bit) Armory 0.92.99.4-testing for RaspberryPi (armhf) Armory 0.92.99.4-testing Offline Bundle for Ubuntu 12.04 exact (32bit) Armory 0.92.99.4-testing Offline Bundle for Ubuntu 12.04 exact (64bit) Armory 0.92.99.4-testing Offline Bundle for RaspberryPi (armhf) Armory 0.92.99.4-testing: Signed hashes of all installers |
|
|
|
- On armory github in the Tags section, both .zip and .tar.gz of Testing-0.92.99.3 are, in fact, the source to 0.92.3
Okay, so my release scripts apparently botched the git tagging process. It appears it checked out and signed the master (default) branch, instead of the testing branch. Whoops. I have already deleted that tag from the repo, and will make sure it's done right when we do .4 As for all the other problems mentioned here... we haven't seen that here. We have a lot of addresses and wallets loaded, and everything looks accurate except the "Custom Filter" is broken. However, I also manually deleted the databases folder between loads... as I've been testing build&scan speed a lot. Have you tried manually deleting that folder? (hopefully this is just a .2 to .3 upgrade issue) |
|
|
|
0.92.99.3 is coming either today or tomorrow, correct?
I need the HDD opts ASAP
Should be tonight. We're wrapping up a bunch of the bugfixes and intermediate testing. |
|
|
|
Hi everyone, just a quick update: goatpig has created and HDD_optimization branch in the repo, and my first test confirms that it is dramatically better. Once Core was synchronized, it took only about 45 minutes to both build and scan the databases. This is now dramatically faster than the original LevelDB-based implementation of previous versions.
If you are running from the repo, I encourage you to check out the branch and try it. Otherwise, wait a day or two and we'll wrap up this optimization with a bunch of the other bug fixes into a .3 testing release.
The only thing is I can't build from source using the instructions on the website or build-app.py If you're in linux, it's very quick: https://bitcoinarmory.com/building-from-source/If you are on Windows or Mac... not so easy, and I would recommend you just wait. Especially Windows -- it's a total mess to setup the dev/build environment in windows! |
|
|
|
|
Hi everyone, just a quick update: goatpig has created and HDD_optimization branch in the repo, and my first test confirms that it is dramatically better. Once Core was synchronized, it took only about 45 minutes to both build and scan the databases. This is now dramatically faster than the original LevelDB-based implementation of previous versions.
If you are running from the repo, I encourage you to check out the branch and try it. Otherwise, wait a day or two and we'll wrap up this optimization with a bunch of the other bug fixes into a .3 testing release.
|
|
|
|
|
The desktop version is correct. Did you use the bundled install script (Install_DblClick_RunInTerminal.sh)? You should be able to double-click that in the unpacked folder and then type your password. It will do the rest for you.
I had a freshly installed 12.04.5 virtual machine and did exactly that with the 0.92.3 offline bundle and it worked. Did you maybe grab the 32-bit bundle instead? Did you try installing the packages individually?
|
|
|
|
|
Ugh, I thought we had it on the website. Yes it needs to be 12.04.5. There didn't used to be such a requirement... But I think they changed the packages in 12.04.3.
I'm not even sure if the alternate CD works, since it likely has different packages.
(Edit: sorry misread and thought you said you weren't installing 12.04.5. Nonetheless my last statement still holds... Probably the alt CD)
|
|
|
|
|
So.... just before this testing release we made some "harmless" internationalization upgrades, but I think there was a misunderstanding about how the text formatting and unicode is handled. This explains every malformed text box and unicode error.
We need to go through and revert those changes, and will have it done for the next testing release. I'm not sure how to handle bounties on this. I think at this point, I'll shut off bounties for anything related to unicode errors, and anyone who reported it to this point will get at most 2 bounties for all of them. Fair?
This is why we have testing versions...
|
|
|
|
Using 0.92.99.1 on Windows 7.
I started Armory with the following command line (D:\Armory does not exist yet):
"C:\Program Files (x86)\Armory\ArmoryQt.exe" --satoshi-datadir="D:\bitcoin" --datadir="D:\Armory" --supernode
Without showing any error message, Armory opened using %appdata%\Armory as its data directory.
If I create D:\Armory first, it works as expected.
That's actually a long-standing bug with Armory... if the datadir doesn't exist, it uses the default. I've wanted to fix it for like a year, but I guess it never quite hit priority. |
|
|
|
Armory 0.93 is now in testing! For details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919202Worry not, everyone on the Armory team is alive and well, despite the lack of updates over the last few months. We've been working diligently on both 0.93 as well as some not-yet-public things that you'll hear about soon! In the meantime, please help test 0.93 testing version and claim some bounties! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919202I'll just reiterate two important points from that thread: - (1) This uses a new DB engine which is not compatible with the 0.92.3 databases. If you are short on disk space, I recommend waiting to upgrade, and/or manually deleting the 0.92 databases after you've confirmed 0.93 works for you. Before the final release we will determine an appropriate way to automatically delete the old DBs, or at least ask the user.
- (2) You should not upgrade to Core 0.10 without this version!. In other words, this new version of Armory is required if you plan to use the new version of Bitcoin Core (headers-first). Luckily, they will probably both be officially released about the same time (end of Jan 2015).
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
