BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: noisy on April 25, 2016, 03:31:32 am
-
Everyone was so exited when BM announced that he have an idea for solving problem with fees. I have prepared a quick recap what happens when:
On Feb 5 @bytemaster during hangout described whole idea starting with words: "Could we imagine a scenario where the blockchain had no fees, at all?" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmHrwuvoK3I&feature=youtu.be&t=22m50s)
On Feb 8 @-banano- created a topic Will this community be surpporting BM's "zero fee" proposal to get micropayment? (http://Will this community be surpporting BM's "zero fee" proposal to get micropayment?) where 74 (93.7%) forum members agreed that this is a good idea.
On Feb 10 @bytemaster posted on his blog: How to build a Decentralized Application without Fees (http://bytemaster.github.io/article/2016/02/10/How-to-build-a-decentralized-application-without-fees/)
On Feb 14 @abit created post: Rate Limited Free Transactions Feature Implemented (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=21462.0)
On March 1 @abit created a ticket #603 on cryptonomex/graphene github (https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/issues/603) - Implement simple rate limited free transaction feature.
On March 8 @abit created a Pull Request #612 (https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/pull/612) - "Implement rate limited free transactions feature #603"
On March 2 @abit first time (according to my knowledge) mentioned in comment of #603 (https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/issues/603#issuecomment-190953869): "We need a BSIP document for this feature."
What happen next?
Today is April 25.
Rate Limited Free Transactions are still not a part of bitshares.
Some time ago I asked on dev slack of graphene:
(http://i.imgur.com/hw8ivu1.png)
This feature stucked somewhere and it seems that right now no one is finalizing a work on that.
I created this blog post in good faith, that this will help us:
- describe what is needed to finish that job (what are the blocker? Missing BSIP? Testing? Code Review? Something else????)
- develop a plan (with described steps) how to do that
- prepare a schedule for those steps with deadlines
We have to do something with that. I have a feeling that most of work is already done. It would be stupid and totally ineffective to abandon that work and this idea right now.
-
I think the BSIP is functionally complete but the code is not (yet), if I recall correctly, there was something missing in regards to monitoring bandwidth and adjusting available bandwidth per share.
Also, I remember that Dan mentioned he invented that feature specifically for STEEM and opened a public discussion in BitShares to have it migrated over to BitShares eventually.
If you ask me, we should wait a little until that technology matures in STEEM and then pay CNX to migrated it over to BTS. Most bugs and calculations should be fixed and it is way easier to hardfork steem than BitShares (due to the still smaller ecosystem). What I would love to know is how much of @abit's work has ended up in STEEM.
-
I think the BSIP is functionally complete but the code is not (yet), if I recall correctly, there was something missing in regards to monitoring bandwidth and adjusting available bandwidth per share.
Also, I remember that Dan mentioned he invented that feature specifically for STEEM and opened a public discussion in BitShares to have it migrated over to BitShares eventually.
If you ask me, we should wait a little until that technology matures in STEEM and then pay CNX to migrated it over to BTS. Most bugs and calculations should be fixed and it is way easier to hardfork steem than BitShares (due to the still smaller ecosystem). What I would love to know is how much of @abit's work has ended up in STEEM.
IMHO, my code is functionally completed (according to the brief feature description I wrote in github), but the BSIP is not there. Whether we need to modify the code, depends on the final BSIP, aka what the stake holders want exactly.
In STEEM there is another implementation done by CNX, which is independent of my work, and is a totally zero-fee feature. Whether BitShares will migrate to zero-fee, depends on stake holders (read: voting). Personally I wouldn't recommend that since it's a too big change which will probably kill the referral program.
Blockers of this feature:
* BSIP & voting on BSIP: what the stake holders want exactly
* Community take over the github repository: some people/group who can release a new hard fork and the stake holders/witnesses/exchanges/business partners will follow
* code review: for better quality
* testing: for better quality
* fund (not to me)
If you want something be done, just do it.
If you want to be paid, just ask.
If you don't have time or required skills, look for someone who has.
If you're willing to fund, great!
//Edit:
If I understood correctly, the Rate Limited Fees feature is super high priority? Would you like to write a feature definition document in the formal BSIP format for us? I'm a bit sick of requesting for deployment/hard fork without a detailed feature definition document.
Sure, I'll pony up 10k BTS for the bounty. Let me know who to pay when it's finished.
I'll add another 10k
-
If you want something be done, just do it.
The factors mentioned do not seems to be a show-stopper. If the codes have been tested (by abit), can we put this feature up for a shareholder vote?
-
If you want something be done, just do it.
If you want to be paid, just ask.
If you don't have time or required skills, look for someone who has.
If you're willing to fund, great!
+5%+5%+5%+5%+5%+5%+5%+5%+5%
-
* testing: for better quality
@xeroc can you also deploy it on testnet?
-
* testing: for better quality
@xeroc can you also deploy it on testnet?
With the help of abit .. I think so ..