Slight clarification:

I see a scenario where darkwallet dev pretty much becomes a
conversation about competing STRATEGIES for inputs and outputs
selection (plumbing level), while common usage of darkwallet at the
porcelain functionality level encourages the ecosystem to take root
and mature.

I really want darkwallet to succeed! :)

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Thomas Hartman
<thomas@???> wrote:
> I have created a proposal for accounts (which I call KEYCHAINS to
> reclaim the accounting language for formal accounting), and a
> lightweight wallet I am calling sx-litewallet, at
>
> https://github.com/spesmilo/sx/issues/42
> sx LITEWALLET (proposed) <blocked by #41, #26>
>
> and
>
> https://github.com/spesmilo/sx/issues/41
> sx keychain/utxo database (proposed)
>
> I am really interested to hear what the unsystem folks think.
>
> I am aware there's also a curses based wallet included with sx, but
> for pedagogical and prototyping purposes, I think it makes sense to
> keep everything command line.
>
> If this roadmap can be implemented fully, focus of darkwallet dev
> shifts to implementing STRATEGIES (see issues 24 and 31) for choosing
> inputs and outputs, given wallet databases. I think we would see real
> world use of sx by a wider audience, since change handling becomes
> easier and we can now refer to keys by human-memorable names rather
> than doing everything on an extremely low level.
>
> This is sort of like git's notion of having "porcelain" high level
> commands and "plumbing" low level commands (see git man page).
>
> The wallet and db commands are porcelain, whereas most of the existing
> commands, and some new commands I proposed for selecting outputs and
> inputs, become plumbing. Something that normal users would not execute
> for normal use, but make it easier for developers and hands on folks
> interested to lift the hood and see how bitcoin works, without paying
> the full cost of reading the source code.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 3:27 AM, Jorge Timón <jtimon@???> wrote:
>> I wouldn't implement accounts/purses at a low level.
>> Bitcoin-Qt did this and now we still have a weird and insecure
>> accounting system coupled with the basic bitcoind API.
>> People think it does things that doesn't do. We even had an exchange
>> using these "features" for the accounting of the exchange in
>> Freicoin!!
>> We have disabled those JSON calls in freicoind and I hope they will
>> eventually disappear from bitcoind too when the wallet and the core
>> are properly decoupled.
>>
>> --
>> Jorge Timón
>>
>> http://freico.in/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libbitcoin mailing list
>> Libbitcoin@???
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libbitcoin