Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 606. (Read 1276933 times)

counterpartyd does have some unit tests, however as PhantomPhreak alluded to, the coverage definitely isn't fully there. In any case, human exploratory QA is always a big plus with ferreting out problems. I think having QA test procedures make sense, if there are members of the community that are willing to do QA.

SyRenity (or anyone else who may be interested), feel free to fork off the QA docs and put together some for counterpartyd. I'd be happy to include them within the main docs, or we can have a separate site for them (either works). It would basically be documentation with how to get the environment up and running for QA (which could mostly just refer to the existing build system documentation), as well as QA testing/bug submission procedures (i.e. file any bugs in github), and possibly the start of a manual test plan (or we can just leave it to be ad-hoc testing, since most all fixed tests we should be able to implement in an automated function).

I can see manual QA testing being particularly valuable with the build system (i.e. someone to keep up a VM of each supported platform, and test any new releases against that platform to make sure they build correctly).

Also, we would also be happy to accept any code enhancements to the existing automated tests -- ESPECIALLY around making API calls. Anyone possibly interested in this should contact PhantomPhreak or I.

QA isn't the sexiest thing out there, but it's needed, especially for financial software like Counterparty.

EDIT: If you do fork, please fork from the original Bitcoin version of the test plans that Gavin made, as the Mastercoin fork is pretty much identical (or different in non-applicable ways) and I don't see the value in forking from that.

Who exactly owns asset DOGE? I seem to duking it out with someone who issued later, but in a proper amount. Ownership has changed hands 3-4 times already with different counterpartyd versions.

And is it just me or can no asset start with the letter "A"?

... you're going to need a bigger list. Lol.

I'd like to hear what xnova has to say about this, especially with regard to any potential insufficiency in the current unit test suite.

Are there any restrictions (besides having more than 3 letters) when creating assets?

Also, I think there should be a significant fee for asset issuances, otherwise we'll get spammed with "parked" assets from people who just want to reserve nice names.

Yup, send BTC or using btcpay have different function.
I didn't test btcpay.
But from what I understand, it's only purpose is to actually transfer BTC when an order has matched.
XCP for BTC for example.
When the order match, you have x blocktime to use btcpay with data attached to it (the Matched Order ID).

My point/wonder was:
If send-cmd did allow to directly send BTC,
then maybe btcpay-cmd (could) become useless / no longer required.
For as soon as the both order matched, the transfer of BTC could be instant (and not anymore require manual transfer of BTC with btcpay).

XCP/asset fund transfer is instant at match.
XCP/BTC or asset/BTC should be too, for a convenient/fast/quality decentralized exchange.

Could this be improved?
(ex. keep using btcpay (if still required) but in hidden background, all automatic)

If you are running counterpartyd installed, just use this:

This will show all XCP as well as all other assets in your wallet.

I burned via blockchain.info wallet a few days ago and can see that it has been recorded in the blockscan. It has registered XCP against it.

I understand the Private Keys need to be imported from the blockchain.info wallet into BitcoinQT and then we need to use CounterPartyd to send XCP to the Bitcoin address.

Is that correct?

Sorry if this question was already answered but I was wondering. Is there a command of some sort to check your total balance of XCP in linux or window command prompt?

The 'btcpay' message type needs to have data attached to it, so that it cannot be confused with regular BTC payments.

As far as I can tell, bitcoind sometimes seems to have performance issues that cause it to putz out like this when there are a lot of RPC API calls being made against it (especially on a slower over overloaded machine). I committed a patch to counterpartyd that attempts to keep the HTTP connection open between RPC calls. This may help.

Correct me if I'm wrong:
If you add this feature, as a bonus btcpay would not be needed anymore.
Therefore fastening exchange between BTC and XCP/assets (and lowering the total fee).
That would be great.

It doesn't appear to be a big deal.
My guess is that it is linked with your Internet connection (low probability, over using bittorrent?) or your hardware (stronger probability).
May be something else, I'm no expert.
I don't get this message, but I get the same effect once in a while.
I guess pretty much at each block, I get 5~30sec unavailable.
Result is that sometimes counterpartyd tell me bitcoind is behind (while it run 24h/24), 2 min max after it's okay.
I have only 2GB ram and cheap hardware.

Devs, I just found a nice QA plan for MSC:
https://github.com/marv-engine/QA

Perhaps we can fork and adapt it for XCP testing needs, so community could submit bug reports in proper manner?

Exactly my point. Need more details here.

Seems to happen every now and then, but doesn't seem to affect anything.

Btw, I have been burning on Win 7 32 bit and it has been going smoothly. Thanks all for the answers and help.
If somebody wants to burn I can do for a small fee.

I usually don't get answers here, but well, let's keep trying

Does anybody else have this problem? This happens everytime I try do build the database. I even can't surf for a few seconds, while this happens. Anybody got an idea what could be causing this? I only have this problem while running counterparty. I use bitcoin-qt.

+1
The Burn made more money than their donation bucket? Last time I checked, they banked like $20,000/day.. so where does that money go? doesn't CounterParty take a share?

The new instructions worked under win 7 32 bit and its now currently rebuilding the database. I guess I will have to wait till it catches up.

I still didn't get an answer - while burning from command line, it has a from and amount. So does that mean no transaction fee? Will it get stuck then?

EDIT: got the answer - it automatically adds the fee.

Anyone care to outline the send command with counterpartyd ?

Very well documented, awesome work