Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - oxarbitrage

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
61
update in the burning:

worked just burned 127118 BTS: http://open-explorer.io/#/operations/1.11.115677591

62
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: escrow - to burn or not to burn
« on: January 12, 2018, 10:53:32 pm »

63
Hello stakeholders, this is the last report from this worker in this thread.

I have a new worker proposal voting now to start 22th of this month as i am taking a week of vacation starting today.

Take a look at the new worker proposal here and vote for it if you like:

https://github.com/oxarbitrage/worker-proposals/blob/master/bitshares2018_1.md

New worker proposal number is 1.14.75

If approved, the reports will be posted bi weekly on the new worker thread at:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,25713.0.html

I want to thank everybody for supporting me and i hope i can continue here for the starting year, very exiting year for sure.

The worker has liquidated all the payment left and in the process of burning back 127118 BTS to the chain. This operation is already made and it is just waiting for 1 approval vote from the worker escrow, this will be happening in the next few hours.

Now let me go over the last advances, this was a period where it was hard to reach other bitshares devs for the holiday season, for this reason most of the work was focused outside core.

bitshares-core:

- issue https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/549 fixed with merged pull request: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/pull/551

- https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/528 finished documentation for elasticsearch plugin and moved to wiki page of bitshares: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/wiki/ElasticSearch-Plugin

- Small readme notes changes: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/pull/562

- review and merged https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/pull/557

- merged https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/pull/568 from [member=120]xeroc[/member] - docker updates.

- created new api call get_top_markets - https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/pull/560

there are some other pending reviews from [member=18687]abit[/member], [member=94]pc[/member] and [member=120]xeroc[/member] that i will be able to finish when i came back from vacation or they will review each other if they want to merge before that.

account history exporter:

an account history exporter was made:

http://open-explorer.io/bitshares-account-exporter/index.php

It makes use of the elasticsearch node plugin and wrapper. Open source code in php can be found at: https://github.com/oxarbitrage/bitshares-account-exporter

There are plans to make a reduced version of it only exporting fill orders to be used with https://cointracking.info/

udf wrapper:

The udf wrapper was finished https://github.com/oxarbitrage/udf-bitshares-wrapper and was added as a proof of concept to the 2 explorer versions:

http://open-explorer.io/#/markets/CNY/BTS
http://bitshares-explorer.io/#/markets/CNY/BTS

The issue for it in UI was closed: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/773

I received the payment, i wanted to exchange it for some explorer work with the UI guys but they are to busy to do so at the moment.

Still, there are going to be more opportunities to make this deal in the future with other features the UI may need.

- bitshares-api-backend:

In addition to fixes i always do to this repo when i find a bug from the explorer i am now getting some contributions from [member=46331]knaperek[/member]. He is helping as a volunteer to learn some bitshares with several stuff like dockerizing the project and fixing some bugs.

His contributions can be found at:

https://github.com/oxarbitrage/bitshares-python-api-backend/pull/1
https://github.com/oxarbitrage/bitshares-python-api-backend/pull/2
https://github.com/oxarbitrage/bitshares-python-api-backend/pull/3
https://github.com/oxarbitrage/bitshares-python-api-backend/pull/4

All of them were merged.


Thank you guys all again.

64
this looks so good with open source code, i cant wait to take a look into this in more detail, looks very promising.

65
If we plan for a fixed release schedule we need the resources to deliver. Which means mostly it's up to our paid developers. You decide, [member=18687]abit[/member] [member=43274]oxarbitrage[/member] . :-)

i think a HF around every 6 months will be healthy but yes we need to have enough quality stuff to worth the effort.

the best to me will be as we made it last time that worked. this is:

- a dedicated worker proposal to work in a bsip or big feature with hardfork(will be great if we can have [member=94]pc[/member] again on it).
- worker will take care of the hardfork planning while a few satellite changes are added to the same hardfork(like the one on this thread).
- other devs contribute in this side changes and help the hardfork worker with the planning, testing, etc.

this should be done every X months resulting in more or less a planned hardfork release every X time.

66
planned hardforks every 6-9 months ... sounds good to me so everyone can be ready and core devs can work on having enough stuff for a hardfork inside those period of times. i like the idea, we need to spread it starting with [member=94]pc[/member] and [member=18687]abit[/member].

67
i think they call it airdrop or something like that. i don't like the technique either.

68
hey there, i think you guys are taking the right steps, i don't consider the change so minor, it actually backed by a BSIP(even if it ended with a new operation) and it requires a hardfork. need to be tested on the public testnet and will probably became operational with other changes that require hardfork.

the plan we have for hardforks is 1 "big" change plus a few other small changes at the same time. this can be considered as one of the small changes.

i am getting out for vacations for a week tomorrow so i will not have time to review it but i will take a more detailed look at the code and start some tests when i came back.

keep the good work! welcome to the bitshares core.

69
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares Account History Exporter
« on: January 07, 2018, 10:30:58 pm »
Does not appear to be working?

200 limits aren't helpful, but I'm getting empty CSV.

i just tried it and i am not getting empty results, make sure you use your account id , not your name. make sure the dates you are using are timeframes where operations were made.

70
General Discussion / Re: open sourcing the explorer.
« on: January 05, 2018, 05:37:55 pm »
thanks [member=21490]Thom[/member] . the only problem is that the unthemed version even if made from scratch uses some of the stuff that was already present in the themed licenced version. All what it uses is open source so i am 99% sure it will not be a problem if i just release it now but to be 100% sure i added this people to the private repos so they can take a look and make sure. maybe is the work for a lawyer specialized in code licence stuff, i don't know any unfortunately so i am leaving it at the hands of the bitshares community.

my main concern is actually be totally sure this will not bring any future problems to bitshares.

71
thank you guys  :)

72
General Discussion / Re: Creating a new UI based on Bitshares
« on: January 04, 2018, 09:21:47 pm »
definitely possible , there is already enough open source material to do it, however not an easy and short time job, it  will take time and effort.

73
General Discussion / Re: open sourcing the explorer.
« on: January 04, 2018, 09:19:12 pm »
bumping the thread, hoping to get the code released as soon as possible now the holidays passed. thanks again!

74
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: escrow - to burn or not to burn
« on: January 04, 2018, 08:09:04 pm »
IMO the excess BTS must be burned. The worker had a clearly defined scope and a clearly defined price. Both have been fulfilled, so using the extra BTS for other purposes would be a breach of contract, in a way.

This holds for all workers, not just yours specifically, of course.

thanks [member=94]pc[/member] . yea, it is probably be the best. the idea to keep it was mostly to cover some downside the BTS can have and the low BTS per day the new worker is claiming at current rates, trying to avoid the creation of a new worker proposal in the middle of the contract.
in a renew scenario like this one that can apply to the UI worker, abit worker, etc.

anyways. probably not a good idea, we should just burn the extra bts after the contract ends(i think need to wait a few days to all the funds became available). whatever we do will be discussed here and never be done in silent.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13