[bisq-network/proposals] Investigate alternative implementation for bisq (as basis for V2 / off-chain trading) (#125)

[Justin Carter]

> I don't see the benefit of rewriting for the sake of rewriting. 

Completely agree. I'm proposing a rewrite for the sake of:
- security
- productivity
- extensibility

And only based on the assumption that the overlap between v1 and v2 is not very large / easy to re-implement. ie. it will be a hard-fork with completely new code for handling trading - which means a rewrite of some portion of the code anyway.

> What might make more sense is to define the v2 protocol strictly and allow for different clients using something like a `bisqd` with the api.

A well defined protocol contract for `v2` would certainly be good.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/125#issuecomment-538828719
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20191006/8291e6b7/attachment.html>