We're trying to add extra functionality to the wallet by incorporating 3rd party services.
You cannot pre-empt all possible future iterations of error by proxy
unless we then reduce the extra functionality we incorporate into the wallet (which will be boring if we do that).
I think some credit where credit is due for at least identifying the issue in a timely fashion is in order.
irrelevant, upgradeadvice has just proved his pro skills (in a timely fashion)
i'm sure he'll find a way to filter that sort of errors on a code level,
since it's an obvious vulnerability
You sound like a "borg".
If only you were 7 of 9
It would definitely be more tolerable.
7 of 7, but don't get me wrong.
an error in additional feature subroutine shouldn't cause the whole shell failure, just that
Agreed, it's a fair point, but please remember "context".
This is all experimental software..we are at the cutting edge of the birth of a whole new era of financial technology...
that and we fit stuff in around families, and jobs, and hobbies, and paying the bills etc etc etc
But anyway, we're all a friendly bunch, and your feedback is appreciated, so please don't stop, though it can be interpreted as not very "supportive"
(we're a sensitive bunch too lol)
We'll continue moving forward with this project, and as always, all are welcome.
