[bisq-network/bisq] [WIP] Atomic bsq trades (#5729)

[chimp1984]

I just looked mostly at the UX and looks good to me overall. Congrats!

Here some remarks:
I think the field in red should be hidden.
<img width="1066" alt="Screen Shot 2021-09-28 at 21 37 09" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/54558767/135154443-7248821f-c106-43f4-abba-850b79b374d2.png">

Maybe better to call it "Atomic swaps" instead of "Atomic trades" 
Also in the take offer screen maybe better to use: SWAP instead of ATOMIC!!
And "BSQ swap" instead of "Atomic BSQ" in offerbook

In general maybe better not use `atomic` at all in the UI. For non techies it might sound confusion (nuclear - might create more environmental concerns ;-)). Maybe just call it BSQ swaps (swap might be too generic if we once add cross chain swaps)?

I got that expection after having one swap done and started another without creating a new block in between. I guess the BSQ change was not confirmed....
```
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Failed to prepare maker inputs
	at com.google.common.base.Preconditions.checkArgument(Preconditions.java:142)
	at bisq.core.trade.atomic.protocol.tasks.maker.AtomicMakerVerifiesTakerInputs.run(AtomicMakerVerifiesTakerInputs.java:58)
	at bisq.common.taskrunner.TaskRunner.next(TaskRunner.java:69)
	at bisq.common.taskrunner.TaskRunner.handleComplete(TaskRunner.java:85)
	at bisq.common.taskrunner.Task.complete(Task.java:58)
	at bisq.core.trade.protocol.tasks.AtomicTradeTask.complete(AtomicTradeTask.java:45)
	at bisq.core.trade.atomic.protocol.tasks.maker.AtomicMakerVerifiesAmounts.run(AtomicMakerVerifiesAmounts.java:85)
```
After creating a block it worked. Could take same offer.

In the code maybe better use BsqSwap instead of Atomic. AtomicProcessModel sounds confusing as the ProcessModel is not atomic but a ProcessModel for an atomic bsq swap.

Also would avoid the postfix I like in ProcessModelI.
Better rename the ProcessModel with some short prefix (DefaultProcessModel if no better found)

I think addP2PMessageFilter will not work as filterManager.getFilter() is likley null at startup. I would also use a concrete type for message not Object. And would invert the result as now false is expected that the predicate is evaluated true.

-- 
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/bisq/pull/5729#issuecomment-929580317
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210928/45529012/attachment.htm>