Feathercoin Core 0.11.1.1 Launch

lizhi

I update core to 0.11.2 , We can keep up with bitcoin.
Core 0.11.2 add BIP65, ability to implement OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY.

mirrax

@lizhi Hello Lizhi, I recieved 100k FTC from Mr. Kraken as donation for your work on Core. Please post your address. :)

lizhi

Hi mirrax, thanks for your help, I will keep the development for Feathercoin,if you are willing to donate, my wallet is 71whQbi6pq2aCSvMvcTKCcTZDfAbUvf2Se

mirrax

@lizhi said:

Hi mirrax, thanks for your help, I will keep the development for Feathercoin,if you are willing to donate, my wallet is 71whQbi6pq2aCSvMvcTKCcTZDfAbUvf2Se

I just sent you 100 000 FTC!
9358797413bd5a3a7e060682d82ac0c2a4f9530f5563e1c4d3a5607fd1e93996-000

But I only forwarded this generous message.
You say thank you to Kraken, not me :)

I love what you do with wallet, please be with us also this year, 2016!

lizhi

We need to add some new 0.11.2 nodes.the more the better.

Now, 0.11.2 accounted for 4.3%
[all version ] (http://www.ftc-c.com/pack4/fullnode.png)

mirrax

@lizhi said:

We need to add some new 0.11.2 nodes.the more the better.

Now, 0.11.2 accounted for 4.3%
[all version ] (http://www.ftc-c.com/pack4/fullnode.png)

OK, I will upgrade to 0.11.2 on windows and keep 0.9.3 on linux…

Wellenreiter

@lizhi said:

We need to add some new 0.11.2 nodes.the more the better.

Now, 0.11.2 accounted for 4.3%
[all version ] (http://www.ftc-c.com/pack4/fullnode.png)

Why do we need them?

[Edit]
If we need the clients to test funcionality and/or features we should start the testnet again
[/EDIT]

wrapper

Just saying thanks and kudos / browny points to all helping with testing the latest versions of FTC… ;)

Wellenreiter

@lizhi

I’m just testing 0.11.2

got it compiled with far less problems than I had with 0.9.x

I just started the gui and it shows ‘MFTC’??!???

wrapper

should that be mFTC? in settings

plus : updated source code Link at Thread header to version 0.11.2 on Github

Wellenreiter

@wrapper said:

should that be mFTC? in settings

plus : updated source code Link at Thread header to version 0.11.2 on Github

Will check that next time I start the gui. Currently testing the daemon

sync is ongoing
importing a private key for a wallet address is working

Wellenreiter

A comment from my side about 0.11.x:

for me both versions are currently in Beta test, as we

don’t have pre-compiled binaries (started to work on that yesterday)
have many references to “Bitcoin” in the help texts and some in the gui
don’t have a clear picture (or sould I say ‘1 don’t’? ) how the bc and network behaves, if the new block version is enforced
have no information of the status of pools, if when and how they’ll implement 0.11.2

But that is just my opinion. :D

What do others think?

mirrax

@Wellenreiter said:

A comment from my side about 0.11.x:

for me both versions are currently in Beta test, as we

don’t have pre-compiled binaries (started to work on that yesterday)

have many references to “Bitcoin” in the help texts and some in the gui

don’t have a clear picture (or sould I say ‘1 don’t’? ) how the bc and network behaves, if the new block version is enforced

have no information of the status of pools, if when and how they’ll implement 0.11.2

But that is just my opinion. :D

What do others think?

Looks like a valid points. I think it is important to push Core 0.11.2 so more people can test and feedback.
Also I would like to see 0.9.x features migrated to 0.11.2 (Lizhi is working on migration)

wrapper

Actually it is cool that we can test the new version on the live network, then go back to the previous version. Having more mechanisms to handle database upgrades and forks is pretty neat, and necessary in the long run…

Wellenreiter

@mirrax said:

…
Also I would like to see 0.9.x features migrated to 0.11.2 (Lizhi is working on migration)

another point to not advertize 0.11.2 and clearly flag it as “development only” version.

We can’t start to publish revisions and then implement changes, so we currently can’t make 0.11.2 a release yet.

From Github:

Tagging suggestions

It’s common practice to prefix your version names with the letter v. Some good tag names might be v1.0 or v2.3.4.

If the tag isn’t meant for production use, add a pre-release version after the version name.  Some good pre-release versions might be v0.2-alpha or v5.9-beta.3.
Semantic versioning

If you’re new to releasing software, we highly recommend reading about [semantic versioning.](http://semver.org/)

I think those are simple and effective rules and we should try to adhere to them

Wellenreiter

@wrapper said:

should that be mFTC? in settings

plus : updated source code Link at Thread header to version 0.11.2 on Github

Actually the meaining is ‘Mega FTC’ :)
The gui offers:

FTC
kFTC
MFTC
mftc
µFTC

AcidD

Do any of the versions/wallets of FTC notify the user when there’s a new official release ?

Is there a way that can be broadcast on the network ? …like “hey guys…time to upgrade!”

wrapper

Funny you should mention that one reason “pchMessageStart.” - is required to be unique.

FTC had messages at one stage from LTC to upgrade, and Bush had to turn off that upgarde message facility to stop that happening. Not sure what keys you need to certify the message

mirrax

@aciddude said:

Do any of the versions/wallets of FTC notify the user when there’s a new official release ?

Is there a way that can be broadcast on the network ? …like “hey guys…time to upgrade!”

Should be, i think it was actually used before neoscrypt hardfork.

mirrax

@wrapper said:

Funny you should mention that one reason “pchMessageStart.” - is required to be unique.

FTC had messages at one stage from LTC to upgrade, and Bush had to turn off that upgarde message facility to stop that happening. Not sure what keys you need to certify the message

Yes, it was turned off because it was broadcasting LTC messages, but it was fixed and used before neoscrypt hard fork…