I'm really enjoying using Armory and have expressed my appreciation in a small donation (which I intend to repeat whenever I can). Thank you for all the work you've put into Armory.
I only find myself missing 2 features:
1. The main thing I'm missing is the ability to filter the wallet view. Say I'm holding a wallet for someone else and I don't want to see it. It's possible to save it offline and mark it as someone else's watching only wallet, which removes it from the total balance, but I still can't filter the view so that this wallet does not appear. Is this a feature you plan to implement? If so, if you'd tell me your planned approach, I'd be happy to give it and try and submit a pull request for you to review. If you're not interested in it, I'll probably keep a private fork with this feature since it's so important to me.
2. I'm surprised you don't generate a qrcode for offline transactions (for both the online transaction data and offline signed tx). Some of us have qr code scanners which would make the whole offline signing process a lot quicker. Any plans to implement this?
Thanks again for all your work on this -- I'm very impressed. I've been a happy user of the Satoshi client for ~2 years but am switching to Armory for the offline transactions and other features. I'm recommending the same to my friends and family. Well done!
Thanks w1R903!
I will eventually get to making the wallet view more... flexible. Along with sorting. I just haven't gotten there yet. What I will do is have the filter at the bottom, pop up a checklist of your wallets, and you can choose which ones you want to see at any given time. Of course, with the preset defaults I've got, already.
The problem with QR codes is that there are so many transactions that
won't fit into 1 QR code. Or even 10 QR codes! Yes, it works for *some* transactions, but certain usage patterns it will not work at all. Ever! It's something I've had to battle with every time I look at this problem: 90% will be under 5kB.... but some people will consistently produce multi-megabyte transaction "packets" to be moved back and forth. I really want to save my effort for a solution that will work 100% of the time!
