Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bisq Bitcoinj Fork Maintainer #8

Open
cbeams opened this issue Sep 4, 2017 · 22 comments
Open

Bisq Bitcoinj Fork Maintainer #8

cbeams opened this issue Sep 4, 2017 · 22 comments
Labels
help wanted team:dev https://bisq.wiki/Dev_Team

Comments

@cbeams
Copy link
Member

cbeams commented Sep 4, 2017

This role is responsible for maintaining Bisq's fork of bitcoinj at https://github.com/bisq-network/bitcoinj. This includes but is not limited to doing big, valuable work like implementing Bisq's needs around SegWit and integrating that support into Bisq (see bisq-network/bisq#1139).

This role is (or at least can be) more than narrowly bitcoinj-specific: we need one or more contributors to can stay on top of all Bisq's Bitcoin needs, to stay abreast of what's happening at the protocol level, to get proactive about things.

Note that Bisq also maintains a federation of Bitcoin Core nodes as a service to its users for the purpose of mitigating privacy risk caused by bitcoinj's approach to bloom filter-based SPV. The contributor playing this role could also become one of the @bisq-network/btcnode-maintainers (see #66) and help tune settings for all the nodes in our federation, maintain common bitcoin.conf files for the set of @bisq-network/btcnode-operators (#67) that run them, etc.


Docs: none, other than the above
Team: @bisq-network/core-maintainers
Primary owner: @oscarguindzberg

@cbeams cbeams added the role:dev label Sep 4, 2017
@cbeams cbeams removed their assignment Sep 4, 2017
@cbeams cbeams changed the title bitcoinj maintainer Bitcoinj Maintainer Jan 2, 2018
@cbeams cbeams added role and removed role:dev labels Jan 3, 2018
@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

ManfredKarrer commented May 1, 2018

2018.04 report

Following roughly the BitcoinJ mailinglist or updates about Segwit. Seems there is still no release in sight. Looking out for a dedicated developer for the Bitcoin part, but so far nobody has showed up.

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2018.05 report

Updated BitcoinJ to fix a wrong value for dust limit and filter out the confusing alert warning caused by old bitcoin nodes. Followed a bit discussion on the Bitcoin mailing list where they are discussing to fade out support for BIP 37 (bloom filter).

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2018.06 report

Beside a small commit for a log level change nothing to report.

@cbeams cbeams changed the title Bitcoinj Maintainer Bisq Bitcoinj Fork Maintainer Jul 6, 2018
@cbeams
Copy link
Member Author

cbeams commented Jul 6, 2018

Update: Acting as @bisq-github-admin-1, I've set up access rights to our Bitcoinj fork, as well as our libdohj and btcd-cli4j forks such that @bisq-network/core-maintainers have write access to the repositories. This was to cut down on creating additional GitHub teams where they're not really necessary, and to reflect the fact that in practice, it is the core maintainers (particularly @ManfredKarrer as primary) who are caring for these forks for the time being. Assuming someone does come along to take care of our Bitcoinj fork, we can set up a dedicated team at that time. The description of this role issue has been updated to reflect.

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2018.07 report

Nothing to report.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#93

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2018.08 report

We reverted a code change done in January to improve the broadcast reliability. As it turned out that change had the opposite effect for unknown reasons.
The default BitcoinJ policy was to broadcast to half of the connected nodes and wait to hear back from the half of those. As 12 nodes was default connection target, it was broadcast to 6 nodes and waited to hear back from 3. As we have less nodes (8-9) as default connection target we changed the polity to broadcast to all and wait to hear back from only 2. There was one bug that we waited in fact only for one node to hear back - but even that often did not happen. It seems BitcoinJ has some weird side effect that if we broadcast to more nodes the likelihood to hear back is lower, which is very counter intuitive. After longer testing with different settings we reverted to the original policy so we broadcast to 50% and then wait for 50% of those, so with 8 connections we broadcast to 4 nodes and wait for 2 nodes. This change was shipped with 0.8.0 and hopefully reduces the bugs with failed transactions broadcasts.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#112

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

ManfredKarrer commented Sep 27, 2018

2018.09 report

Fixed an issue with duplicated peers in case of disconnections and re-connections.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#125

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2018.10 report

Nothing to report.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#155

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2018.11 report

Nothing to report.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#180

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2018.11 report

Coordinate with @oscarguindzberg update to 0.14.7 and review of Bisq changes.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#189

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2019.01 report

Nothing to report.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#205

@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Member

2019.02 report

Nothing to report.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#227

@oscarguindzberg
Copy link

oscarguindzberg commented Mar 29, 2019

2019.03 report

Audits:

Other improvements:

Research/exploratory tasks:

/cc bisq-network/compensation#250

@oscarguindzberg
Copy link

oscarguindzberg commented May 8, 2019

2019.04 report

@bodymindarts
Copy link

I'd be happy to help out with this role. I'm interested in contributing to bisq and think adding support for segwit would be a good first task for me to tackle.
I have started by creating a bisq specific bitcoinj based off of upstream release 0.15.3. https://github.com/bodymindarts/bitcoinj/tree/bisq_0.15.3

@mrosseel
Copy link
Member

mrosseel commented Sep 4, 2019

@bodymindarts glad you are interested, don't forget about the existing bisq fork of bitcoinj (https://github.com/bisq-network/bitcoinj) and the segwit code which is either in a PR or merged.

@sqrrm
Copy link
Member

sqrrm commented Sep 4, 2019

@bodymindarts there is a PR for bisq's updated bitcoinj at bisq-network/bisq#2772

@bodymindarts
Copy link

@mrosseel I'm pretty sure the segwit code has already been merged in bitcoinj 0.15.x

@sqrrm thank you, I'm aware of that PR but its based on bitcoinj 0.15.1. I think we should rebase it on 0.15.3 before merging. Thats what I'm currently working on.

@bodymindarts
Copy link

After discussing with @ManfredKarrer it seems preferable as a long term strategy to reduce the dependency on bitcoinj as much as possible. To accelerate that I am investigating bisq-network/proposals#32 which may enable us to remove large section of wallet functionality. This seems like a better activity for the longterm than putting effort into something that ideally should be removed anyway.

@cbeams
Copy link
Member Author

cbeams commented Apr 13, 2020

I've removed @oscarguindzberg as the assignee for this role as there have been no cycle updates since 2019.04 and I'm leaving it unassigned to reflect the reality that no one is owning this role at the current time. I've also re-added the help wanted label (@m52go, I'm not sure why it was removed in 2019.08 #28 (comment)).

@m52go
Copy link

m52go commented Apr 13, 2020

@cbeams discussions with the chimp at the time indicated that updating bitcoinj was so arduous and time-consuming (at least for the purpose of supporting segwit) that it didn't make sense to make it a priority given all the other high priorities of the project.

The Bisq v2 proposal from that time was also a consideration (i.e., seemed better to spend resources to develop and build that instead of maintaining bitcoinj in Bisq v1).

I think 1 or 2 folks had come by expressing interest in the role (not sure how serious) and weren't met with a whole lot of interest.

Taking all of this into account, it didn't make sense to keep the role marked as help-wanted.

@cbeams cbeams added the team:dev https://bisq.wiki/Dev_Team label Apr 15, 2020
@HenrikJannsen
Copy link

This role has been repurposed for Bisq 2 Security Manager

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
help wanted team:dev https://bisq.wiki/Dev_Team
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

9 participants