• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

v0.10.13.x RC5 Testing

Status
Not open for further replies.
How many years did Microsoft spend trying to get the status bar working well? They eventually gave up and went with the looping option for most uses...
Exactly. Simple users just want to see that something is happening. If they want to know the actual status, they can go into coin control for the nitty gritty (no different than a windows user clicking expand during an install and seeing the command line install.
 
Just an animated status bar that loops would be suffice.

I guess. I think this is just a personal preference thing. I don't think the current bar is confusing, but if the majority do then a looping status bar is far better than nothing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
****** PLEASE UPDATE TO v9.13.9 (Stable) OR 10.13.9 (RC) *******

There's good reason why we don't use three participants for DS on testnet, there's just not enough wallets to combine with to keep the network going all of the time. I really just wanted to make sure 3 worked, so we could use it on mainnet.

- Testnet merges use two, while mainnet merges will use 3 participants
- Fixed the endless splitting issue causes by splitting 1000DRK and not making a DS compatible input

(waiting for flare's excellent compiling service)

Is "three participants DS" going to solve the sybil attack issue ?
Masternode snooping appearing to be easy fix. Is it going to be implemented in RC 5 ?
 
I guess. I think this is just a personal preference thing. I don't think the current bar is confusing, but the majority do then a looping status bar is far better than nothing.
When money is not directly involved the users may not care about that. But it's a different story here, a looping status bar is like : "I'm maybe stuck or I'm working fine, keep looking for the answer in few days, hours, minutes who knows ? :wink:"
 
When money is not directly involved the users may not care about that. But it's a different story here, a looping status bar is like : "I'm maybe stuck or I'm working fine, keep looking for the answer in few days, hours, minutes who knows ? :wink:"
...and the progress bar as is is any better? Right.
 
When money is not directly involved the users may not care about that. But it's a different story here, a looping status bar is like : "I'm maybe stuck or I'm working fine, keep looking for the answer in few days, hours, minutes who knows ? :wink:"

You are preachin' to the choir man. :smile:
 
When money is not directly involved the users may not care about that. But it's a different story here, a looping status bar is like : "I'm maybe stuck or I'm working fine, keep looking for the answer in few days, hours, minutes who knows ? :wink:"
Actually the loop is already there, just not in a GUI for you to see, but if you have participated on testnet or have actually used Darksend on main net, you should have seen the loop in words, like these...

"Submitted to masternode, waiting in queue .
Submitted to masternode, waiting in queue ..
Submitted to masternode, waiting in queue ...
Submitted to masternode, Waiting for more entries (1/2 ) .
Darksend is idle

Submitted to masternode, waiting in queue ...
Darksend denomination is incompatible... Will try again...
Darksend is idle

Submitted to masternode, waiting in queue ...
Submitted to masternode, Waiting for more entries (2/2 ) ...
Submitted to masternode, entries 2/2
Darksend request complete: Transaction Created Successfully! (If you're lucky or know how to get to this part)
Darksend is idle
.......... "

I wouldn't look for this info in a loop bar or any bar, but I read it and decide what's next for my anonymization, and it's better to know where my money is in the loop than to just let it sit there with unlocked encryption.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Definitely an issue, could you sent the wallet.dat to me please? [email protected]

Is Chaeplin reply also still an issue ? or has the protocol version been updated since ?


Also how will we proceed with the RC5 testing now.. with regards to your latest info about possibly implementing anonymous instant transactions ?
 
Is Chaeplin reply also still an issue ? or has the protocol version been updated since ?
The protocol version will be fixed in the next release (v10)

Also how will we proceed with the RC5 testing now.. with regards to your latest info about possibly implementing anonymous instant transactions ?
Testing will continued as normal, anonymous instant transactions are scheduled for post RC5. We will release v10 later the day.
 
Is "three participants DS" going to solve the sybil attack issue ?
Masternode snooping appearing to be easy fix. Is it going to be implemented in RC 5 ?

The sybil attack issues will be fixed, but the snooping attack will be fixed later, it's a bit more involved than it seems. However, for snooping to work you would need to control all masternodes that a specific input went through(8 rounds = 8 separate masternodes). So it's not a very feasible attack anyway.
 
****** PLEASE UPDATE TO v9.13.10 (Stable) OR 10.13.10 (RC) *******

- Changed splitting strategy to deal with some edge cases (endless splitting for a few users)
- Updated stable proto version

Stable Binaries
http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/master-rc5/darkcoin-qt
http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/master-rc5/darkcoind

RC5 Binaries
http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/rc5/darkcoin-qt
http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/rc5/darkcoind

CI-builds for v0.9.13.10-g6aca2ab

Windows 32bit:
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/DWD-DRK/QTL/build-122/gitian-win-darkcoin-bin/32/darkcoin-qt.exe
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/...tian-win-darkcoin-bin/32/daemon/darkcoind.exe
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/...oin-bin/32/darkcoin-0.9.13.10-win32-setup.exe

Mac OS X:
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/browse/DOD-DRK-103/artifact/QTL/gitian-osx-darkcoin/DarkCoin-Qt.dmg

Linux 32bit:
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/BL-DRK/QTL/build-101/gitian-linux-darkcoin-bin/bin/32/darkcoin-qt
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/BL-DRK/QTL/build-101/gitian-linux-darkcoin-bin/bin/32/darkcoind

Linux 64bit:
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/BL-DRK/QTL/build-101/gitian-linux-darkcoin-bin/bin/64/darkcoin-qt
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/BL-DRK/QTL/build-101/gitian-linux-darkcoin-bin/bin/64/darkcoind

CI-builds for v0.10.13.10-g38e0802

Windows 32bit:
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/...arkcoin-rc-darkcoin-qt-bin/32/darkcoin-qt.exe
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/...coin-rc-darkcoind-bin/32/daemon/darkcoind.exe

Mac OS X:
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/browse/DOD-DRKRC-40/artifact/QTL/gitian-osx-darkcoin-rc/DarkCoin-Qt.dmg

Linux 32bit:
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/...tian-linux-darkcoin-rc-bin/bin/32/darkcoin-qt
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/...gitian-linux-darkcoin-rc-bin/bin/32/darkcoind

Linux 64bit:
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/...tian-linux-darkcoin-rc-bin/bin/64/darkcoin-qt
http://bamboo.darkcoin.qa/artifact/...gitian-linux-darkcoin-rc-bin/bin/64/darkcoind
 
...and the progress bar as is is any better? Right.
Huh yeah...
Between this
h6viz.gif

And this
Ke935.gif

I prefer the latter.
 
Huh yeah...
Between this
h6viz.gif

And this
Ke935.gif

I prefer the latter.
I don't care for either of those. If you want to keep the progress bar fine, but make sure it actually represents what is going on. Right now there is confusion among it. It's not going to be any easier for someone new to it to understand what it even means when it doesn't hit 100% or when you change rounds or coins and it starts at x%, etc, etc.
 
I don't care for either of those. If you want to keep the progress bar fine, but make sure it actually represents what is going on. Right now there is confusion among it. It's not going to be any easier for someone new to it to understand what it even means when it doesn't hit 100% or when you change rounds or coins and it starts at x%, etc, etc.
I understand that there are some issues with it. But it's essential for the user experience to display a progress bar reflecting the status of the process. E.g. You have set 8 rounds and the progress bar indicates 50% ---> the process has already performed 4 rounds of anonymization : simple to explain and to understand.
 
I understand that there are some issues with it. But it's essential for the user experience to display a progress bar reflecting the status of the process. E.g. You have set 8 rounds and the progress bar indicates 50% ---> the process has already performed 4 rounds of anonymization : simple to explain and to understand.
If it worked like that, we would be in agreement, but it doesn't (or at least didn't when you start adjusting settings). If the progress bar represents to actual progress of anon, it belongs. If it doesn't, then it shouldn't be included. Ether way, one of those has to give.
 
If it worked like that, we would be in agreement, but it doesn't (or at least didn't when you start adjusting settings). If the progress bar represents to actual progress of anon, it belongs. If it doesn't, then it shouldn't be included. Ether way, one of those has to give.
No it doesn't work like that, but are we not here to share ideas and to find a solution ? :)
 
LOL I was waiting for the image to load.

I would prefer a text label with counting dots:

"Doing stuff ."
"Doing stuff .."
"Doing stuff ..."
"Doing stuff ...."
"Doing stuff ....."
"Doing stuff ."
"Doing stuff .."
"Doing stuff ..."
lol
I like both, let's take the user by the hand. :wink:

[IIIIIIIII 48% ]
Anonymization in progress .... 2nd round
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top