Skribent: Eric Voskuil Dato: Til: Thomas Hartman CC: libbitcoin@lists.dyne.org Emne: Re: [Libbitcoin] License - what about a truly free license (humble
and extremely important enquiry for the project)
Yes :)
I'm traveling, a little slow today.
e
> On May 14, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???> wrote:
>
> Since libbitcoin is an obelisk dependency, I can answer my own question with: yes.
>
> And add, that it would be nice to support testnet/mainnet at runtime with obelisk as well.
>
>
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???> wrote:
>> That being said, testnet obelisk servers are:
>>
>> https://wiki.unsystem.net/index.php/Obelisk/Servers >>
>> I suppose to run obelisk as testnet is a compile time decision as well, right?
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???> wrote:
>>> Feature request at
>>>
>>> https://github.com/spesmilo/sx/issues/72 >>>
>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???> wrote:
>>>> I suppose I would go with
>>>>
>>>> sx --network=testnet3
>>>>
>>>> Backwards compaible, with mainnet the default.
>>>>
>>>> I would target getting sx working with testnet without recompiling, before targetting sx for altcoins. I think it encompasses a lot of the same issues, but more tractably.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Eric Voskuil <eric@???> wrote:
>>>>> The testnet option is compiled into libbitcoin, an sx dependency. It would be nice for this to instead be configurable.
>>>>>
>>>>> e
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 14, 2014, at 7:28 AM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suppose
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sx --currency=litecoin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> with bitcoin default might work. This would be backwards compatible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That being said, to me, this is only a really attractive option if all the currency-specific code can be specified in an config file that is read at compile time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suppose this would be things like the genesis block, and scrypt vs sha.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps a similar mechanism could also be used to control whether testnet or mainnet is specified.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe there is a way to distinguish testnet/mainnet with sx already but I couldn't figure it out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 6:26 AM, mlmikael <mlmikael@???> wrote:
>>>>>>> /LICENSE , I missed the meaning of rows 31-34 from being stuck at rows 7, 17, 19 and lost among the OpenSSL exception etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I'd have read the word "lesser" on /README row 2 first it I should have had the context not to miss that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LGPL for Debian devs, ok - it's like, Debian prefers LGPL packages for some reasons so therefore consider relicense for everyone?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok very well, now to practical priorities. Just in case you have any new thoughts on Litecoin feel free to tell.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How different do you feel they are with regard to console use, will LibBitcoin operations for Litecoin be done using "sx -l" or by a new "lx"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2014-05-13 23:04, Amir Taaki wrote:
>>>>>>>> yep, let me know where I can add this for clarity. Where did you look
>>>>>>>> first? The README?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BTW I might change the license to vanilla LGPL for Debian devs, but not
>>>>>>>> before discussing with others here first. Thanks for all your input.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Libbitcoin mailing list
>>>>>>> Libbitcoin@???
>>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libbitcoin >>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Libbitcoin mailing list
>>>>>> Libbitcoin@???
>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libbitcoin >
::
Re: [Libbitcoin] License - what abo…
