. - page 7. | Bitcointalksearch.org

JJ12880

hero member

Activity: 671

Merit: 501

Blockchain and stuff

Quote from: niitassin on September 17, 2015, 10:39:48 PM

This is my mistake of doing forks that are just too much, so for now I will have to revert to the Adrenaline Version.... (With the Market and SHA256d Fork)

Everyone makes mistakes here and there. Ive had to learn the hard way too. There have been times ive pushed live code updates to projects that SHOULD have worked, but ended up breaking everything for one reason or another. Ive learned I have to make things iddiot proof, and test test test. If there is a way to break something, some knucklehead will find a way.

IMHO, this is a good place to start. I wish i was more familiar with C++, I would offer to help.

Quote from: cisahasa on September 18, 2015, 06:30:10 AM

revert code back to that market version.
update protocol every time you make a change.
you should revert version and pump protocol to 70001
atleast generate new key pairs to alert/checkpoint code.
(there are still 2 key pairs for spork and masternodes)

now the keys are in hands of icm, he can destroy the coin at this point if he wants.

JJ

cisahasa

legendary

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

from console:

makekeypair

{
"PrivateKey" : "308201130201010420e62aa5c9c1f910ad9b0b8e2a1b1ccbb1f7a5fc6c5f03d3da603707610697b 385a081a53081a2020101302c06072a8648ce3d0101022100ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff fffffffffffffffffffffffffefffffc2f300604010004010704410479be667ef9dcbbac55a0629 5ce870b07029bfcdb2dce28d959f2815b16f81798483ada7726a3c4655da4fbfc0e1108a8fd17b4 48a68554199c47d08ffb10d4b8022100fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffebaaedce6af48a03 bbfd25e8cd0364141020101a144034200041cf40e6019ecfcf2f50ec953c1230c3acf6975eaeca1 4c373ee97d716a4d4b3606c0359c61f6bc4791aaa010229d3316b60194981e24f6c8cf968d13bbd 93120",
"PublicKey" : "041cf40e6019ecfcf2f50ec953c1230c3acf6975eaeca14c373ee97d716a4d4b3606c0359c61f6b c4791aaa010229d3316b60194981e24f6c8cf968d13bbd93120"
}

catotune

sr. member

Activity: 422

Merit: 250

Meow

Quote from: CryptoVote on September 17, 2015, 09:52:57 PM

Most of the changes made were meaningful but it wasn't well explained to the community. Niitassin is a great developer but releasing a new version is not all dev work like end user acceptance. Most the time the developer is way ahead of the end users at understanding the changes (because we have to code them) so explaining can be difficult.

If we gave folks a few MONTHS to test, upgrade and digest the changes, this would have been a much smoother transition. ICM is likely gone forever so please don't scare away the devs that want to help.

Well said, and I agree that a well thought-out and communicated update to Crave would be fine, as long as the community is given enough time to understand, test, and give their consensus on it.

I just never felt right about this one, and my doubts were justified in the end. I am usually not this upset about anything that happens in the altcoin universe, but this "update" really cost me a lot of money and time that I should have instead spent with my family.

CryptoVote

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 100

Oops.

CryptoVote

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 100

Quote from: catotune on September 17, 2015, 09:04:59 PM

I agree completely with this statement, especially the part about a fork requiring community acceptance and cooperation.

I never got the sense that the entire CRAVE community supported, or even really knew about, this fork. I feel like someone (I won't say some "child", because I won't hold his age against him) just decided to make a bunch of crazy changes to a well-established, stable coin, and created a thread announcing he was going to take it over and everyone better upgrade to his version or else.

And like an idiot, I followed along. I lost dozens of hours trying to keep up with this nonsense, and I lost hundreds of coins in the transition between all the different versions (addresses with large balances whose private keys don't have any CRAVE when importing back into the old wallet).

If ICM updates his source, I will update my client. If this, or any other, random dev announces that he is going to "take over" this coin in the future, I am going to take it with a huge grain of salt. Lesson learned.

Most of the changes made were meaningful but it wasn't well explained to the community. Niitassin is a great developer but releasing a new version is not all dev work like end user acceptance. Most the time the developer is way ahead of the end users at understanding the changes (because we have to code them) so explaining can be difficult.

If we gave folks a few MONTHS to test, upgrade and digest the changes, this would have been a much smoother transition. ICM is likely gone forever so please don't scare away the devs that want to help.

catotune

sr. member

Activity: 422

Merit: 250

Meow

Quote from: CryptoVote on September 17, 2015, 06:04:29 PM

I think our problem was a lack of testing and an necessary rush to deploy a new version. I never understood the urgency. Coordinating a fork takes time and requires community acceptance/cooperation.

I agree completely with this statement, especially the part about a fork requiring community acceptance and cooperation.

I never got the sense that the entire CRAVE community supported, or even really knew about, this fork. I feel like someone (I won't say some "child", because I won't hold his age against him) just decided to make a bunch of crazy changes to a well-established, stable coin, and created a thread announcing he was going to take it over and everyone better upgrade to his version or else.

And like an idiot, I followed along. I lost dozens of hours trying to keep up with this nonsense, and I lost hundreds of coins in the transition between all the different versions (addresses with large balances whose private keys don't have any CRAVE when importing back into the old wallet).

If ICM updates his source, I will update my client. If this, or any other, random dev announces that he is going to "take over" this coin in the future, I am going to take it with a huge grain of salt. Lesson learned.

CryptoVote

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 100

Quote from: hawaii18k on September 17, 2015, 01:00:19 PM

I don't know the reason for your persistent attempt to switch over into new algo, but your credibility has been tarnished due to recent rc3 fiasco. Community will probably resist your next move.

Why not just fix the problem for now. Stick to icm qt for now and postpone the new forking until rc3 is properly fixed. No crashing. No unintended forking. Let not your hard work go to waste.

When that is done, however slow it maybe, you can dish out your new grand plan. Earn credibility, Earn respect.

Everyone makes mistakes. Difference is some learns from it. Perfection comes with price.

Thanks for your Crave efforts!!

*edit
Btw, I did like new qt when it worked. Small memory foot print and not resources heavy. Good for my old mn pc.

I think our problem was a lack of testing and an necessary rush to deploy a new version. I never understood the urgency. Coordinating a fork takes time and requires community acceptance/cooperation. Unless there is a zero day exploit, we should never rush to deploy new, untested code.

I think the Crave urge market version was a good release:
https://github.com/laptoptip/crave/releases/download/v2015.08.28/crave-urge-32.7z

hawaii18k

member

Activity: 81

Merit: 10

Quote from: niitassin on September 17, 2015, 11:54:12 AM

Quote from: niitassins_dad on September 17, 2015, 10:54:45 AM

My son is taking the right decision. Crave rebrand:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12445532

I'm not sure if you are fudding or trying very hard to piss me off....

Also, amid this confusion I will basically swap all the damn coins to a new chain, cisahasa, could you kindly enlighten me on any more vulnerability because I am caught myself in a hole...

Also, nobody updates, everybody is fucked in this chain trap, for now, switch back to the ICM Version of Crave....

It's not a rebrand, it a rebirth BTW

I don't know the reason for your persistent attempt to switch over into new algo, but your credibility has been tarnished due to recent rc3 fiasco. Community will probably resist your next move.

Why not just fix the problem for now. Stick to icm qt for now and postpone the new forking until rc3 is properly fixed. No crashing. No unintended forking. Let not your hard work go to waste.

When that is done, however slow it maybe, you can dish out your new grand plan. Earn credibility, Earn respect.

Everyone makes mistakes. Difference is some learns from it. Perfection comes with price.

Thanks for your Crave efforts!!

*edit
Btw, I did like new qt when it worked. Small memory foot print and not resources heavy. Good for my old mn pc.

EmilioMann

legendary

Activity: 2184

Merit: 1028

#mitandopelomundo

Don't change the name of the currency

niitassins_dad

newbie

Activity: 13

Merit: 0

My son is taking the right decision. Crave rebrand:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12445532

hawaii18k

member

Activity: 81

Merit: 10

Thanks. I will try that.

cisahasa

legendary

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: hawaii18k on September 17, 2015, 09:24:59 AM

So I probably need to ditch my new rc3 qt and use old qt to rejoin the larger block chain. But which one? oxy? or earlier one? Anyone got download link?

link some page behind here..

i downloaded old chain from zero, did not take a long.

and you cant join old chain with rc3, its a mess now.
i would use ICM dev wallet for now. that is uptodate with explorers.
trades are in maintenance..

hawaii18k

member

Activity: 81

Merit: 10

So I probably need to ditch my new rc3 qt and use old qt to rejoin the larger block chain. But which one? oxy? or earlier one? Anyone got download link?

cisahasa

legendary

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

i have no idea..
but if you can make working release, just put it out and let people choose.(win current wallet crashes for me)

CryptoVote

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 100

Quote from: cisahasa on September 17, 2015, 08:09:52 AM

Quote from: CryptoVote on September 17, 2015, 08:07:37 AM

Quote from: hawaii18k on September 17, 2015, 02:41:04 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 02:10:47 PM

Quote from: cisahasa on September 16, 2015, 12:39:34 PM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:33:13 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 11:23:00 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:14:43 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 11:08:51 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:05:42 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 10:40:29 AM

So which ~~fork~~chain/network is valid one?
At this moment this is kinda madness, people will loose their coins.

The one with the latest client

Do you understand consequences of your proceeding?

Yup

So do you have thousands of crave to spend on refunds?

Excuse Me? I have told to update the client, If you don't update it, that is then your fault

i agree 8-bit. this was too short time shot.

2 ways to cover damage.
post pone all forks to future. or keep current chain and get angry messages..

Wait, okay, I have edited the code and postponded the fork to Block 200000

Can someone help me clarify the situation now? I have set up 3 mns fresh with rc3 just before this comment was made, which was early today. It initially couldn't sync so I deleted existing block chain and reload the chain from the beginning and it worked. Withdrawal of 500 from bittrex right before maintenance came through no problem and started to earn .6666 whatever. So i thought fine.

When I checked the block chain from explorer, it showed different chain. Mine was shorter vs longer chain shown on block explorer. It did show initial transfer of 500 but anything else after was not in that chain.

Clearly, block chain forked. Question is, which one is legit? longer one or my shorter one? Or no one know yet and perhaps depends on Bittrex's decision?

When nittassin said, "I edited the code to postpone the fork to block 2000", does it mean, rc3 download has been altered, that I need to delete my current mn install and download, restart again?

Help me. I got dumb from too much sun!!!!

The shorter chain is RC3. Should I recompile the Windows version to create RC4 (postpones the fork)? I need to go to work but when I get back in 8 hours, I can recompile and send the link. It is not clear to me what the community wants to do.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--1182590

Sorry for the stupid question but is that a no?

cisahasa

legendary

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: CryptoVote on September 17, 2015, 08:07:37 AM

Quote from: hawaii18k on September 17, 2015, 02:41:04 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 02:10:47 PM

Quote from: cisahasa on September 16, 2015, 12:39:34 PM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:33:13 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 11:23:00 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:14:43 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 11:08:51 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:05:42 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 10:40:29 AM

So which ~~fork~~chain/network is valid one?
At this moment this is kinda madness, people will loose their coins.

The one with the latest client

Do you understand consequences of your proceeding?

Yup

So do you have thousands of crave to spend on refunds?

Excuse Me? I have told to update the client, If you don't update it, that is then your fault

i agree 8-bit. this was too short time shot.

2 ways to cover damage.
post pone all forks to future. or keep current chain and get angry messages..

Wait, okay, I have edited the code and postponded the fork to Block 200000

Can someone help me clarify the situation now? I have set up 3 mns fresh with rc3 just before this comment was made, which was early today. It initially couldn't sync so I deleted existing block chain and reload the chain from the beginning and it worked. Withdrawal of 500 from bittrex right before maintenance came through no problem and started to earn .6666 whatever. So i thought fine.

When I checked the block chain from explorer, it showed different chain. Mine was shorter vs longer chain shown on block explorer. It did show initial transfer of 500 but anything else after was not in that chain.

Clearly, block chain forked. Question is, which one is legit? longer one or my shorter one? Or no one know yet and perhaps depends on Bittrex's decision?

When nittassin said, "I edited the code to postpone the fork to block 2000", does it mean, rc3 download has been altered, that I need to delete my current mn install and download, restart again?

Help me. I got dumb from too much sun!!!!

The shorter chain is RC3. Should I recompile the Windows version to create RC4 (postpones the fork)? I need to go to work but when I get back in 8 hours, I can recompile and send the link. It is not clear to me what the community wants to do.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--1182590

CryptoVote

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 100

Quote from: hawaii18k on September 17, 2015, 02:41:04 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 02:10:47 PM

Quote from: cisahasa on September 16, 2015, 12:39:34 PM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:33:13 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 11:23:00 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:14:43 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 11:08:51 AM

Quote from: niitassin on September 16, 2015, 11:05:42 AM

Quote from: 8-bit-Party on September 16, 2015, 10:40:29 AM

So which ~~fork~~chain/network is valid one?
At this moment this is kinda madness, people will loose their coins.

The one with the latest client

Do you understand consequences of your proceeding?

Yup

So do you have thousands of crave to spend on refunds?

Excuse Me? I have told to update the client, If you don't update it, that is then your fault

i agree 8-bit. this was too short time shot.

2 ways to cover damage.
post pone all forks to future. or keep current chain and get angry messages..

Wait, okay, I have edited the code and postponded the fork to Block 200000

Can someone help me clarify the situation now? I have set up 3 mns fresh with rc3 just before this comment was made, which was early today. It initially couldn't sync so I deleted existing block chain and reload the chain from the beginning and it worked. Withdrawal of 500 from bittrex right before maintenance came through no problem and started to earn .6666 whatever. So i thought fine.

When I checked the block chain from explorer, it showed different chain. Mine was shorter vs longer chain shown on block explorer. It did show initial transfer of 500 but anything else after was not in that chain.

Clearly, block chain forked. Question is, which one is legit? longer one or my shorter one? Or no one know yet and perhaps depends on Bittrex's decision?

When nittassin said, "I edited the code to postpone the fork to block 2000", does it mean, rc3 download has been altered, that I need to delete my current mn install and download, restart again?

Help me. I got dumb from too much sun!!!!

The shorter chain is RC3. Should I recompile the Windows version to create RC4 (postpones the fork)? I need to go to work but when I get back in 8 hours, I can recompile and send the link. It is not clear to me what the community wants to do.

CDarvin81

member

Activity: 81

Merit: 10

Quote from: niitassins_dad on September 17, 2015, 07:37:58 AM

Quote from: CDarvin81 on September 17, 2015, 07:31:32 AM

So...
The newest version from github didn't crashs again.
The Problem ist what is the official chain?
Blockexplorers chains are much bigger the any of ny chains.
Is the fork done or are the new versions <50%?

No one is following my son Cry

All services, blockchain explorers and exchanges are still on the old chain!

Ok thanks... so i will switch back...

niitassins_dad

newbie

Activity: 13

Merit: 0

Quote from: CDarvin81 on September 17, 2015, 07:31:32 AM

So...
The newest version from github didn't crashs again.
The Problem ist what is the official chain?
Blockexplorers chains are much bigger the any of ny chains.
Is the fork done or are the new versions <50%?

No one is following my son Cry

All services, blockchain explorers and exchanges are still on the old chain!

CDarvin81

member

Activity: 81

Merit: 10

So...
The newest version from github didn't crashs again.
The Problem ist what is the official chain?
Blockexplorers chains are much bigger the any of ny chains.
Is the fork done or are the new versions <50%?

Topic: . - page 7. (Read 49297 times)