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

Justin Carter notifications at github.com
Mon Oct 7 17:47:26 UTC 2019

>  To support multiple trade protocols in a backward compatible and interoperatible way would cause 10x more effort...

Good argument for having a clean seperation between v1 and v2 protocols. (ie. different apps / code bases)

> This is wisdom which is true for "normal" engineering but not for concensus based projects. Even Satoshi warned of having multiple Bitcoin implementations and Ethereum showed why he was right with his warning. In a perfect world, yes it would be good but we are in a fast moving under-resourced imperfect world.

This is why I'm not proposing to re-implement the _current_ protocol, rather focus on the v2 protocol.

> Tell Oracle to fix their mess with their new release cycles. Forcing people to a new version which is not sufficiently supported by the surrounding infrastructure (java packager is still missing) is not sign of good company strategy.

Imo another good argument for moving away from the java ecosystem.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20191007/f60ccc51/attachment.html>

More information about the bisq-github mailing list