Namecoin Forum

Since Bitcoin just released the official 0.12.0, I've tagged another Namecoin release: https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/releases/tag/nc0.12.0rc2 This is directly based off the final Bitcoin 0.12.0. If you can, please test and give feedback. When there seem to be no issues, we can also relea...

Thanks a lot, great! I will try to give it a review as soon as I find time - but I'm also looking forward to getting the feedback (and testing) of others, of course.

A brief comment from my side: If the code in question is not directly GUI-related (e. g., depending on Qt) but does general wallet handling, I see no big deal in adding the functions always even if they are then only used from the GUI. In respect to the pending firstupdates, for instance, those coul...

Another thing we should do: Get rid of using nVersion of transactions for determining whether a tx is a name operation or not. BIP68 will change the nVersion of transactions, which will (somewhat) break this. Should we use one of the bits in nVersion as a flag instead? Is there any reason why we can...

What's the status on the BIP 9 compatibility fix? Last commit on unabuse-nversion appears to be 24 days ago. I'm quite busy at the moment, but I just yesterday rebased the branch to the latest head. I'm thinking about pull requesting the current code as it is now, which is fully functional and non-...

biolizard89 wrote: Can Daniel and Phelix (and maybe Ryan) comment on whether we should move to github.io until Ryan has a chance to get the server set up?

I don't have any strong opinion here.

You can connect to 51.254.118.108, I run a testnet node there (updated). It is configured to mine a block once in a while (like every day or so), and as far as I can tell, it has the longest chain. It used to be behind a longer "old" chain, but now I don't see it complaining any more. Try to use thi...

Does anyone know of a good path forward to getting the name(s) from only a txid? I'll also need to do some tests to make sure the tx contains a name_op. UPDATE: I got it figured out for now. I'm iterating over CTransaction->vout then looking at each script for isNameScript. Then I'm extracting the ...

Sounds like an interesting approach. One question, though: Why would you keep the values in a Merkle tree? Isn't it enough to just push the value's hash and allow for the values to be transmitted fully "out of band" with respect to the blockchain? The hash ensures that the values are still secured a...

Sounds good, but I still suggest we keep onto it. I've already done some parts of the patch, by refactoring the code a bit and making "generate" and "setgenerate" produce merge-mined blocks. So far, these are non-forking, though. (And not pushed to master, just in a branch of my repo.)