Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add policy relay option in UI #136

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

Retropex
Copy link
Contributor

@Retropex Retropex commented Feb 1, 2024

No description provided.

@kn0wmad kn0wmad requested a review from dr-bonez February 1, 2024 16:28
@kn0wmad
Copy link
Contributor

kn0wmad commented Feb 1, 2024

Is there a reason you did not also add datacarriersize?

Also, have you tested this?

type: "boolean",
name: "Permitbaremultisig",
description: "Relay non-P2SH multisig",
default: false,
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The default in Bitcoin Core is still 'true', not sure if it's ok to change this from the default

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, given that this is Bitcoin Core, we think it appropriate to ship the same defaults as Core.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Retropex Retropex Feb 1, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I will change it if this is a problem, but know that P2MS is no longer used for payment purposes but almost exclusively to add arbitrary data to the chain in the worst possible way.

Also be aware that this relay policy applies only to new output created and not to the already existing one.

The developers in charge of Bitcoin seem to want to change the default value but unfortunately shitcoiners have sabotaged the PR to be able to continue to spam the chain.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I understand the reasoning and on my personal node I'm definitely tweaking some of these settings! But as a developer and provider of the software you have to stay neutral unless absolutely necessary, and in that case it should be communicated and documented clearly why it's steering away from the defaults.

It's very good to provide options to the user, but it's the user themself who should decide if he wants to change options different than the consensus reached in the Core repository.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's good, the default value has been reset to true

@Retropex
Copy link
Contributor Author

Retropex commented Feb 1, 2024

@kn0wmad No none, that's why I just added it :)

Yes, I was able to test and everything is functional, do I have to make a test report or something like that?

@Retropex Retropex changed the title add datacarrier and permitbaremultisig option in UI add policy relay option in UI Feb 1, 2024
@kn0wmad
Copy link
Contributor

kn0wmad commented Feb 5, 2024

@kn0wmad No none, that's why I just added it :)

Yes, I was able to test and everything is functional, do I have to make a test report or something like that?

No, we just like to know that something has been tested before we take a look at it. We are still discussing our strategy in regard to these config options/alternate node installs at a higher level. We appreciate your patience while we figure out the best way forward.

MattDHill
MattDHill previously approved these changes Feb 25, 2024
@MattDHill MattDHill requested review from k0gen and MattDHill February 25, 2024 14:28
@MattDHill
Copy link
Member

MattDHill commented Feb 25, 2024

I just realized these options are not in the correct place in config. These are mempool options and should be listed under the Mempool section

@MattDHill MattDHill dismissed their stale review February 25, 2024 14:40

Requesting changes

@MattDHill
Copy link
Member

Closing in favor of #140 which addresses the comment above and also cleans some things up. Will be sure to give you credit @Retropex, just didn't want to delay getting these features shipped.

@MattDHill MattDHill closed this Mar 13, 2024
@Retropex Retropex deleted the official-repo branch June 4, 2024 13:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants