BitShares Forum
Main => Technical Support => Topic started by: kenCode on March 22, 2015, 09:09:58 am
-
#1 This morning I opened up the bts client and the bottom right corner says "Severe network problems | Blocks are synced" - When I mouseover the word Severe a popup says "Delegate participation rate is below 60%, please consider to postpone all transfers until the rate is back to 100%".
Does this have something to do with the shorting bug?
#2 I see v 0.7.0 is out (https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/releases) however, when in the bts client and I click on File > Check for Updates the alert popup still says "No new updates are available." This feature just hasn't been implemented yet, or?
#3 The "Estimated Yield" values of my bitassets have disappeared too..
Thanx in advance :)
-ken
-
maybe in the technical section, your post would be better
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?board=45.0
-
V 0.7 is a mandatory update, please check github.com first if you see issues.
And the check for update function is broken since forever.
-
Ok, at this time I would like to see a spreadsheet, one that shows:
1. todo list items (prioritized by emergencies first, bug fixes, feature additions, etc)
2. the Delegate(s) responsible for each row item
3. ETA of that item by that/those Delegate(s)
4. Notes/description
Accountability is needed. The outdated wiki, the broken "Check for Updates" feature, the shorting bug...
Man, I'm losin faith here but if you need a COO like me to start lighting some fires, I'm ready.
No more fukn around, my money is invested in this.
-
Ok, at this time I would like to see a spreadsheet, one that shows:
1. todo list items (prioritized by emergencies first, bug fixes, feature additions, etc)
2. the Delegate(s) responsible for each row item
3. ETA of that item by that/those Delegate(s)
4. Notes/description
This info could be seen in
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/issues
The progress can be tracked here.
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/milestones From this link you can see the issues tackled in a specific release candidate. For example:
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/milestones/dvs/0.8.0
0.8.0 is days overdue, it is frustrating, but the records are there.
-
I hope the "Check for Updates" feature will finally work, otherwise what's the point?
I really don't want to have to uninstall and reinstall ever again, just to get an update, that's just ridiculous.
Edit: @fundomatic Thank you for the links. That's exactly what I am looking for and I have submitted my bugfix as an issue on that github page, thank you again :)
-
I hope the "Check for Updates" feature will finally work, otherwise what's the point?
I really don't want to have to uninstall and reinstall ever again, just to get an update, that's just ridiculous.
Edit: @fundomatic Thank you for the links. That's exactly what I am looking for and I have submitted my bugfix as an issue on that github page, thank you again :)
As I pointed out in your other thread, the update feature in the qt is meant for GUI/web_wallet updates only and cannot upgrade the core features for hardforks, etc...
-
And stop pressuring the devs. The webwallet is perfectly fine for the masses, if you find it complicated to keep your system updated, you might want to give the webwallet a try.
-
Got it.
Issues are one thing and I wiil submit bugs that I find now to the github issues page instead.
What about feature requests tho, or a consensus driven to-do list for the devs?
-
What about feature requests tho, or a consensus driven to-do list for the devs?
It very much depends on the request ..
Feature request that do not require protocol changes (i.e. hardforks) don't need to much discussion ... but mainly man power ..
requests that require hardforks need to find support from shareholders!
-
Ok, so then we need two todo lists.
One that requires hardforks and another that just needs manpower.
The one that just needs manpower could be put into a Poll or something, then a Delegate is voted on, right?
-
What about feature requests tho, or a consensus driven to-do list for the devs?
Feature requests can go on github, too. At least when they're sufficiently specified. Anything that needs discussion should be discussed on the forum first.
As a general rule, small features have a certain chance of getting integrated quickly, while anything larger will most likely have to wait until after 1.0.
A consensus driven to-do list is an interesting but tricky subject. Thanks to voter apathy it's really difficult to come up with a reasonable *and* practical definition of "consensus".
-
I was under the impression that feature requests were not welcome on github, only "issues", so if that's the case, then I will detail what I'd like to see and where and get the issue submitted on the appropriate github pages.
2FA is a big one for me. HD is another. Mile-long passwords is another. If I'm going to dump my roth ira, bank accounts, gold coins and other goodies into bitshares and bitassets, I need to know damn well I can't get wiped out. The warm and fuzzy feeling needs to really be rock solid if ya know what I mean.
Bitshares and Bitassets could quite literally be my white knight...
-
I was under the impression that feature requests were not welcome on github, only "issues", so if that's the case, then I will detail what I'd like to see and where and get the issue submitted on the appropriate github pages.
2FA is a big one for me. HD is another. Mile-long passwords is another. If I'm going to dump my roth ira, bank accounts, gold coins and other goodies into bitshares and bitassets, I need to know damn well I can't get wiped out. The warm and fuzzy feeling needs to really be rock solid if ya know what I mean.
Bitshares and Bitassets could quite literally be my white knight...
It's about securing private keys (either just one, or multiple for multsig) .. 2-factor authentication will not help you there as you can only every authenticate against a service that can verify your second factor code .. as in BTS you are your own service provider .. there is no trusted third party to secure your funds ..
The only option that comes to my mind is a multisig that signes your transactions after a 2FA authentication ..
-
It's about securing private keys (either just one, or multiple for multsig) .. 2-factor authentication will not help you there as you can only every authenticate against a service that can verify your second factor code .. as in BTS you are your own service provider .. there is no trusted third party to secure your funds ..
The only option that comes to my mind is a multisig that signes your transactions after a 2FA authentication ..
Sounds good to me. Let's do that. Can you submit that for me on github?
Once I get the warm fuzzies watch the cap go up.
-
It's about securing private keys (either just one, or multiple for multsig) .. 2-factor authentication will not help you there as you can only every authenticate against a service that can verify your second factor code .. as in BTS you are your own service provider .. there is no trusted third party to secure your funds ..
The only option that comes to my mind is a multisig that signes your transactions after a 2FA authentication ..
Sounds good to me. Let's do that. Can you submit that for me on github?
Once I get the warm fuzzies watch the cap go up.
I just today finished up my coldwallet solution with BIP38 encrypted QR codes ..
How tech savvy are you?
https://github.com/xeroc/bitshares-pytools/tree/master/coldstorage
-
Funny you mentioned that, I just started using BIP38 a couple days ago, via a World Bitcoin Network youtube vid on it, so not savvy enuf to code that.
https://www.bitaddress.org
https://bit2factor.org
Bit2Factor.org appears to be going down, can you port your work into the BitShares ecosystem somehow?
Possibly with MetaExchange.info?
-
Funny you mentioned that, I just started using BIP38 a couple days ago, via a World Bitcoin Network youtube vid on it, so not savvy enuf to code that.
https://www.bitaddress.org
https://bit2factor.org
Bit2Factor.org appears to be going down, can you port your work into the BitShares ecosystem somehow?
Possibly with MetaExchange.info?
I thought about porting both sites, too .. don't have the time atm .. but would definitly be worth it