Gavin Andresen (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 2216
Chief Scientist
|
 |
December 21, 2011, 03:58:14 PM |
|
Reposting from email to bitcoin-development mailing list: I've been busy pulling patches into git HEAD for a Bitcoin version 0.6, with the goal of having a Release Candidate 1 out in a couple of weeks. So if you've done all your Christmas shopping and have time to help test, code review, etc. now would be the time. Major changes pulled so far: Implement BIP 11/ 12/ 13: "Standard" multisignature transactions "Standard" OP_EVAL transactions OP_EVAL bitcoin addresses Implement BIP 14 (separate protocol from client version) Private key import/export (RPC commands, not GUI) New DNS seeds |
How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unlike traditional banking where clients have only a few account numbers, with Bitcoin people can create an unlimited number of accounts (addresses). This can be used to easily track payments, and it improves anonymity.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
jimbobway
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1304
Merit: 1014
|
|
December 21, 2011, 07:28:40 PM |
|
Nice. +1
|
|
|
|
|
netrin
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 251
FirstBits: 168Bc
|
|
December 21, 2011, 07:33:26 PM |
|
Great. Thanks Gavin. 0.6 has exciting additions I look forward to testing between the holidays.
|
|
|
|
|
Red Emerald
|
|
December 21, 2011, 08:17:36 PM |
|
Very excited
|
|
|
|
kwukduck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1937
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 21, 2011, 09:38:09 PM |
|
Is BIP 11 going to be usable (eg, by GUI) by the average person or just some core functionality for some potential future changes?
|
14b8PdeWLqK3yi3PrNHMmCvSmvDEKEBh3E
|
|
|
Gavin Andresen (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 2216
Chief Scientist
|
|
December 22, 2011, 01:40:34 PM |
|
BIP 11/12/13 support is Core functionality only for 0.6-- the network needs to support the new transaction types BEFORE users start using them.
|
How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
|
|
|
pointbiz
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 437
Merit: 415
1ninja
|
|
December 23, 2011, 02:51:48 AM |
|
+1
private key import will convince me to move from 0.4 to 0.6
|
|
|
|
|
finway
|
|
December 23, 2011, 04:04:12 AM |
|
This gonna be huge upgrade.
|
|
|
|
netrin
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 251
FirstBits: 168Bc
|
|
December 23, 2011, 05:46:08 PM
Last edit: December 23, 2011, 05:58:42 PM by netrin |
|
Is that gavinandresen/bitcoin-git or bitcoin/bitcoin? If I also pull the anon-ish 'coin control' is that likely to interfere with 0.6 testing? How and where would you prefer test feedback?
|
|
|
|
btc_artist
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 154
Merit: 101
Bitcoin!
|
|
December 23, 2011, 11:24:30 PM |
|
Awesome changes, thanks Gavin!
|
BTC: 1CDCLDBHbAzHyYUkk1wYHPYmrtDZNhk8zf
LTC: LMS7SqZJnqzxo76iDSEua33WCyYZdjaQoE
|
|
|
Gavin Andresen (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 2216
Chief Scientist
|
|
December 24, 2011, 03:07:52 AM |
|
Is that gavinandresen/bitcoin-git or bitcoin/bitcoin? If I also pull the anon-ish 'coin control' is that likely to interfere with 0.6 testing? How and where would you prefer test feedback?
bitcoin/bitcoin is the 0.6 tree I haven't done a code review of the anon-ish coin control, so I don't know if it will mess up 0.6 testing; it might interfere with the multisignature transaction changes. The github issues tracker is the best to report any bugs you find, for general "it sucks" or "I love it" or "can you make this new RPC command to this" the best place is either IRC chat or right here. |
How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
|
|
|
ThiagoCMC
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1000
฿itcoin: Currency of Resistance!
|
|
December 25, 2011, 10:17:01 PM |
|
Gavin,
The Bitcoin 0.6.0 introduces a LOT of new features.
I just want to ask you guys ONE thing:
One month of testing before the oficial release.
Thank you guys for the hard work!!!
Best,
Thiago
|
|
|
|
|
HostFat
Staff
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4214
Merit: 1203
I support freedom of choice
|
|
December 25, 2011, 10:52:18 PM |
|
I see that the "Full URL Support in bitcoin-qt" pull isn't coming, what's wrong with it?
|
|
|
|
proudhon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1311
|
|
December 25, 2011, 11:33:40 PM |
|
Wow! Impressive stuff. Nice work.
|
Bitcoin Fact: the price of bitcoin will not be greater than $70k for more than 25 consecutive days at any point in the rest of recorded human history.
|
|
|
|
ineededausername
|
|
December 26, 2011, 06:15:13 PM |
|
Great. Thanks Gavin. 0.6 has exciting additions I look forward to testing between the holidays.
+1... biggest update ever. |
(BFL)^2 < 0
|
|
|
ThiagoCMC
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1000
฿itcoin: Currency of Resistance!
|
|
December 26, 2011, 10:33:29 PM |
|
Gavin,
The Bitcoin 0.6.0 introduces a LOT of new features.
I just want to ask you guys ONE thing:
One month of testing before the oficial release.
Thank you guys for the hard work!!!
Best,
Thiago
Hi! I'll insist. We need to test version 0.6.0 A LOT before the final release. There are rumors that the Bitcoin network will split in two, one side, people using 0.5.1, 0.4.0.... On the other side, people using 0.6.0... So, I would like to test the version 0.6.0 for a month before the final release... Just to tranquilize the crowd... Best! Thiago |
|
|
|
|
Luke-Jr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
|
|
December 27, 2011, 07:05:32 AM |
|
I see that the "Full URL Support in bitcoin-qt" pull isn't coming, what's wrong with it?
0.6 merging isn't done. At least coinbaser and signmessage-GUI were accepted for 0.6 before it began, and they're still pending. There's some OP_EVAL issues that need to be sorted out as well. |
|
|
|
|
N.Z.
|
|
December 27, 2011, 05:16:27 PM |
|
There are rumors that the Bitcoin network will split in two, one side, people using 0.5.1, 0.4.0.... On the other side, people using 0.6.0... Could you be a little bit more specific? What about those rumors? Where is that yellow press I should read?  |
|
|
|
|
Gavin Andresen (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 2216
Chief Scientist
|
|
December 27, 2011, 10:32:03 PM |
|
There are rumors that the Bitcoin network will split in two, one side, people using 0.5.1, 0.4.0.... On the other side, people using 0.6.0... I've been working hard to make sure there will be no blockchain split, and I've convinced myself I've thought through all the "old/new client sending transactions to an old/new miner" cases. The only case where an old miner could be split off the network is if they are mining non-standard transactions (which means they've modified their mining code) and do not upgrade. If you are in that situation, then you should either stop adding transactions containing OP_NOP1 into your miner's memory pool or upgrade to interpret OP_NOP1 as OP_EVAL. But I've said it before and I'll say it again: don't trust me. I make mistakes. Two serious bugs in my OP_EVAL/multisignature code have been found (and fixed) in the last week. Version 0.6 will have at least a month of release candidate testing. I still firmly believe the benefits of the new 0.6 features far outweigh the risks. Please help minimize the risks; review code if you can, run release candidate on the testnet and try to break them, read the BIPS and try to think of ways bad people might use them to do bad things. Review the contingency plans and think about how they could be improved or if you could help when (when, not if) vulnerabilities are found. |
How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
|
|
|
|
finway
|
|
December 28, 2011, 12:37:21 AM |
|
There are rumors that the Bitcoin network will split in two, one side, people using 0.5.1, 0.4.0.... On the other side, people using 0.6.0... I've been working hard to make sure there will be no blockchain split, and I've convinced myself I've thought through all the "old/new client sending transactions to an old/new miner" cases. The only case where an old miner could be split off the network is if they are mining non-standard transactions (which means they've modified their mining code) and do not upgrade. If you are in that situation, then you should either stop adding transactions containing OP_NOP1 into your miner's memory pool or upgrade to interpret OP_NOP1 as OP_EVAL. But I've said it before and I'll say it again: don't trust me. I make mistakes. Two serious bugs in my OP_EVAL/multisignature code have been found (and fixed) in the last week. Version 0.6 will have at least a month of release candidate testing. I still firmly believe the benefits of the new 0.6 features far outweigh the risks. Please help minimize the risks; review code if you can, run release candidate on the testnet and try to break them, read the BIPS and try to think of ways bad people might use them to do bad things. Review the contingency plans and think about how they could be improved or if you could help when (when, not if) vulnerabilities are found. Thanks,gavin. |
|
|
|
|
