If we will have workflow based on Pull Requests that is great!

On wiki there is a section:

Code review policy

It doesn't mention anything about manual testing. It is common practice (at least in projects in which I worked on) to test each PR (or "each story" like we like to call it) separately. This helps keep main branch stable, what helps in development and makes deployment almost painless.

One of the reviewers may be the author of the change.

I am not sure, whether I understand. Are you suggesting, that developer could make a "self-code-review" in this workflow?

I suggest to require at least 2 reviewers (each has to give "OK" ) and "QA Done" from tester. Like here:


OK... you may say, that you don't have enough testers.. what is not true. I suggest to give a chance a community. I would like to help you with simple fixes and with testing...and I am sure, that there is a lot of guys like me here.

You might also think, that it would be difficult to coordinate all of that. I have already suggested to use gitter for that:

In long run.. this low price could be useful for bitshares. Bitcoin thanks to it's quick rise will give whole cryptocurrencies world a lot of new attention. People will try to find other coin which is right now bellow it's value.

that is way we have to be very active community right now. We have to report bugs, help others with questions... and we have to remember... that right now there is good time to buy lifetime membership.

It suppose to cost ~$100, but right now price is not updated... and 20000 is something like $75-80

 

I already proposed this, but there's currently no way to finance development (check the link in my sig for more info).

I saw this post... but it seems, that in that case I didn't catch the idea. Are you sure, that people actually understand what you proposed? You can attach a poll: [Yes/No/I don't understand the full concept yet].

I will give it a second look.

...
You have to prevent the user from double spending it, so she'd need to send it to a multi-sig address where she controls one key and 'another party' controls the other.

Is it possible that witnesses will control 2nd key?

Quote from: funnybear on November 02, 2015, 07:37:59 am

If the blockchain can issue such IOU and lock up the real BTC,

How is 'the blockchain' supposed to lock up real BTC?

What about https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_burn ? But I am not sure whether this kind of irreversible lock will have economical sense

Second approach: I am also wandering whether multisig could help. Real BTC funds would be secured by two private keys. One private key would be from the issuer, who would send his public key to the network. The second public key... would come somehow from the bitshares network.

Is it possible, that each witness would have only some part of private key? I am thinking about the way... that private key of bitshares network would be used only when witnesses will have consensus...i.e. that there was a transaction, and the issuer want to withdraw his bitcoins.

To be honest, I am not 100% sure, how multisig works... so please be gentle and explain me, what in this idea is wrong, if this is actually impossible.

Freebie is willing to participate in this if anyone is interested

Do you mean that you will develop BtsTip live? Or you meant some other project related to bitshares?

When exactly you have plans to broadcast your first session? You can schedule it on https://www.livecoding.tv/schedule/, and please paste here you livecoding login, then we could subscribe your "channel".