you think now mining very complex and we need use KGW?
Maybe...
I guess you didn't get/read my PM. Not an opinion, fact. There's lots of evidence if you're looking.
https://bitcoil.co.il/pool_analysis.pdfhttp://organofcorti.blogspot.co.il/The mooncoin community also knows it as a fact.
http://www.reddit.com/r/MoonCoin/comments/1x2gon/why_does_the_difficulty_on_pools_takes_forever_to/http://www.reddit.com/r/MoonCoin/comments/1wne3e/official_we_are_working_on_the_muchdemanded/Are you aware of the above?
Actually, I'm
far more concerned by the potential impact on users:
"My mining has dropped to almost nothing each day, can't wait for this gravity well implementation."
"I was finally able to have some fun mining a coin with my laptop and poof, its basically dead until the devs fix it."
But, it's not quite a no-brainer, see the cut'n'pasteable implementation in the fedoracoin codebase and the comments by the mooncoin developer.
https://github.com/fedoracoin/fedoracoin/commit/9102b387506acb230b65fd463f88119b348d6701http://www.reddit.com/r/MoonCoin/comments/1wwfco/official_232014_gravity_well_progress_update/He has my sympathies:
http://www.reddit.com/r/MoonCoin/comments/1x37j1/official_urgent_appeal_we_need_windowsmac_wallet/And, as krecu has observed, 0 pre-mine means 0 $ in the kittty to fund this kind of thing. And, that's where "just not good enough" starts to come in.
PC-only binaries of demos, using code which has not been committed to the existing public github repos. I think that's misconceived - it's not transparent, it's completely opaque. Has the code been tested? Where's the continuous integration logs? There are alternative ways of demonstrating progress that will serve the community better than punting out preliminary PC binaries.
Punt out the Linux code first, then you've immediately got other, informed eyeballs on the source code. That's a lot of work you must have got through ...
According to my reading of the commit logs, the current QubitCoin source code remains largely unchanged from the original qubitcoin clone (of the lightcoin codebase) which was made at the end of August/beginning of Sept last year:
https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/4be9f4d40ea4bd40cf1c99649f1d613a28bb33e1To summarise, the Jan 12 release of the Qubitcoins code was developed on a git clone of litecoin's codebase and then augmented by a copy'n'pasta addition of Max Guevara's addition of automatic checkpointing (clearly borrowed by Max from the ppcoin team's original code, the comments reveal all).
https://github.com/MaxGuevara/quark/commit/79c3190f111cd97cfa653c382417499c1614948cAt the time of writing this post, that particular commit is around 3/4 of the way down to the bottom of page 3 of the paginated list litecoin commits.
https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commits/master-0.8?page=3If you take a look at the fedoracoins codebase, you can see that their dev team is keeping pace with litecoin fixes/basic_enhancements as well as making some eminently borrowable improvements of their own, which, if applied to the QubitCoin code, would directly benefit the community. That's how it's supposed to work., that's how it works everywhere else I've been and there's nothing special about this project to make it an exception.
So, as far as I can tell, the QubitCoins codebase is about six months behind litecoin/fedoracoin/dogecoin/uncletomcobleyandallcoin, so all those subsequent improvements (key-handling, coincontrol, kgw, qt4+5, greater resistance to attack, et.c) are missing from the QubitCoins codebase.
I'm surprised to have to beat the open source drum here: one enormous advantage of the open-source system is not having to re-invent the wheel and commits with compelling titles such as "Fix QT5 compatibility for Coin Control" are simply gifts from one's colleagues, it would appear churlish to ignore them.
With the aid of the litecoin/fedoracoin teams' changelogs, I've been trying to unpick the strands of the changes so that I can separate out the inapplicable scrypt-based material from the qubithash-based material and have been broadly partitioning it out into different branches.
https://github.com/gjhiggins/QubitCoinThat's my repos. I'm Graham Higgins, btw. If anyone wants to exchange notes, observations, etc, you can email me on
gjh@bel-epa.comhttps://www.bel-epa.com/gjh/https://www.ohloh.net/accounts/gjhigginsDoes anyone else see a ludicrous incongruity in using pseudonyms in open source cryptocurrency work? Transparency is as transparency does.
So, given the now rapidly-ageing codebase, I hope you'll forgive me rudely asking a direct question - do you welcome PRs to the repos? What is the procedure for applying for commit privs to the official repos?
Cheers,
Graham
- GRAHAMx5hmAyhznHXg8AfGK7cbDzJyuokU
Perhaps you are very good programmer, at least very knowledgeable, but your intentions are unclear to me!
I have no desire to carry on a conversation about the code and the more indulge in the code with a man who on this forum has two post for all time. To me, you spam the user yet!
Show Posts
More than 100, right ? 117 actually... And for 43 000 kh/s, you need about 50 super high-end servers that cost a kidney.
