Topic: [PoS+PoW] eXocoin [EXO]-gen 2.0- dev. from scratch! Give-Away | Open Beta - page 115. (Read 415654 times)
June 21, 2014, 08:37:01 AM
The coin will be released when it is ready - those trying to rush this out are asking for a lower ROI.
June 21, 2014, 01:38:44 AM
What will happen if devs can not fix bug on weekends?
some of us may leave and others will insist on this.
only the time can tell us who are the winner ?
June 21, 2014, 01:19:56 AM
What will happen if devs can not fix bug on weekends?
Irrelevant ads will happen .......
June 21, 2014, 01:16:32 AM
What will happen if devs can not fix bug on weekends?
June 21, 2014, 12:56:49 AM
Please give us back clean EXO discussion! 
June 20, 2014, 08:02:28 PM
Qora had a network bug after the release version that caused a major fork. Nxt had serious bugs in the early days. I'm sure any new code base is likely to have subtle network bugs to begin with. Our dev refuses to release until he is certain the client and network are stable despite the pressure from the community. His attitude gives me more confidence in the final product, not less. I'm sure he will fix the bug given time, and release a product vastly more stable than the first releases of Nxt and Qora.
+1
Please stop quoting this misinformation. There was no major bug with Qora.
Qora was not almost all lost in Sharexcoin?
Hello
No. Only users that have deposited QORA on that exchange have lost it
due to the scam of the exchange owner.
This is exo thread so lets talk about exo coin here and if you or anybody else have more questions
about QORA I suggest to ask them in here in QORA thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=522102.0;topicseen
June 20, 2014, 05:56:14 PM
Qora had a network bug after the release version that caused a major fork. Nxt had serious bugs in the early days. I'm sure any new code base is likely to have subtle network bugs to begin with. Our dev refuses to release until he is certain the client and network are stable despite the pressure from the community. His attitude gives me more confidence in the final product, not less. I'm sure he will fix the bug given time, and release a product vastly more stable than the first releases of Nxt and Qora.
+1
Please stop quoting this misinformation. There was no major bug with Qora.
Qora was not almost all lost in Sharexcoin?
June 20, 2014, 04:23:07 PM
Qora had a network bug after the release version that caused a major fork. Nxt had serious bugs in the early days. I'm sure any new code base is likely to have subtle network bugs to begin with. Our dev refuses to release until he is certain the client and network are stable despite the pressure from the community. His attitude gives me more confidence in the final product, not less. I'm sure he will fix the bug given time, and release a product vastly more stable than the first releases of Nxt and Qora.
+1
Please stop quoting this misinformation. There was no major bug with Qora.
June 20, 2014, 04:15:52 PM
I believe 100% in dev!
June 20, 2014, 04:14:26 PM
still working on the bug.
As for the chain async: The chains seems to be at any time 100% the same on all nodes. They "only" generate a different hash checksum from time to time (but then *all* are generating different results). So all transactions ever made should be in all chains on all nodes anyway. The bug is not that big as you might think.
Latest test showed that running a testnet without any initiated transactions does not reproduce the issue. So it can only be linked to initiated transactions or to (re)connects of peers.
Secondly, we would not had offered a "public review" / external input. However, many people would like to have that and, additionally, the bug is quite old without major progress, so we can understand that you want to have the final breakthrough on that issue. Anyway we try to solve it till the end of the weekend, as stated.
Let's just wait till we have finished our review of the code of the CTransaction, CBlock and CChain code parts. A professional external review of everything would take too much time. That is not an option for us.
Thirdly, we do want to finish the product first (well finish in terms of having a solid, working client) before marketing, website and so on. There is enough time after that have been done.
regards
exocoin
As for the chain async: The chains seems to be at any time 100% the same on all nodes. They "only" generate a different hash checksum from time to time (but then *all* are generating different results). So all transactions ever made should be in all chains on all nodes anyway. The bug is not that big as you might think.
Latest test showed that running a testnet without any initiated transactions does not reproduce the issue. So it can only be linked to initiated transactions or to (re)connects of peers.
Secondly, we would not had offered a "public review" / external input. However, many people would like to have that and, additionally, the bug is quite old without major progress, so we can understand that you want to have the final breakthrough on that issue. Anyway we try to solve it till the end of the weekend, as stated.
Let's just wait till we have finished our review of the code of the CTransaction, CBlock and CChain code parts. A professional external review of everything would take too much time. That is not an option for us.
Thirdly, we do want to finish the product first (well finish in terms of having a solid, working client) before marketing, website and so on. There is enough time after that have been done.
regards
exocoin
Thanks for the update. My two cents : Devs are doing great Job, so there is no need to spam this thread with complaiments. If they wanna stable client, it will take some time. Rome was not built in a day
June 20, 2014, 03:15:15 PM
still working on the bug.
As for the chain async: The chains seems to be at any time 100% the same on all nodes. They "only" generate a different hash checksum from time to time (but then *all* are generating different results). So all transactions ever made should be in all chains on all nodes anyway. The bug is not that big as you might think.
Latest test showed that running a testnet without any initiated transactions does not reproduce the issue. So it can only be linked to initiated transactions or to (re)connects of peers.
Secondly, we would not had offered a "public review" / external input. However, many people would like to have that and, additionally, the bug is quite old without major progress, so we can understand that you want to have the final breakthrough on that issue. Anyway we try to solve it till the end of the weekend, as stated.
Let's just wait till we have finished our review of the code of the CTransaction, CBlock and CChain code parts. A professional external review of everything would take too much time. That is not an option for us.
Thirdly, we do want to finish the product first (well finish in terms of having a solid, working client) before marketing, website and so on. There is enough time after that have been done.
regards
exocoin
As for the chain async: The chains seems to be at any time 100% the same on all nodes. They "only" generate a different hash checksum from time to time (but then *all* are generating different results). So all transactions ever made should be in all chains on all nodes anyway. The bug is not that big as you might think.
Latest test showed that running a testnet without any initiated transactions does not reproduce the issue. So it can only be linked to initiated transactions or to (re)connects of peers.
Secondly, we would not had offered a "public review" / external input. However, many people would like to have that and, additionally, the bug is quite old without major progress, so we can understand that you want to have the final breakthrough on that issue. Anyway we try to solve it till the end of the weekend, as stated.
Let's just wait till we have finished our review of the code of the CTransaction, CBlock and CChain code parts. A professional external review of everything would take too much time. That is not an option for us.
Thirdly, we do want to finish the product first (well finish in terms of having a solid, working client) before marketing, website and so on. There is enough time after that have been done.
regards
exocoin
good. Thanks for explaining and taking the worries away. And good you didn't forget the other aspect around the wallet. Hope everything will be fine and working soon.
June 20, 2014, 03:10:03 PM
i think the ipo percentage should be change to 60-70%.
anyone agree?
anyone agree?
agree！We are waiting for so long time.
June 20, 2014, 02:56:23 PM
it is a known bug that large blocks are difficult to transfer between clients in blockchain, i think they are fixing this.
i remember a recent beta where the chain worked fine for days till big blocks were made.
"We've Got Big Blocks"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W-fIn2QZgg&feature=kp
June 20, 2014, 01:37:25 PM
still working on the bug.
As for the chain async: The chains seems to be at any time 100% the same on all nodes. They "only" generate a different hash checksum from time to time (but then *all* are generating different results). So all transactions ever made should be in all chains on all nodes anyway. The bug is not that big as you might think.
Latest test showed that running a testnet without any initiated transactions does not reproduce the issue. So it can only be linked to initiated transactions or to (re)connects of peers.
Secondly, we would not had offered a "public review" / external input. However, many people would like to have that and, additionally, the bug is quite old without major progress, so we can understand that you want to have the final breakthrough on that issue. Anyway we try to solve it till the end of the weekend, as stated.
Let's just wait till we have finished our review of the code of the CTransaction, CBlock and CChain code parts. A professional external review of everything would take too much time. That is not an option for us.
Thirdly, we do want to finish the product first (well finish in terms of having a solid, working client) before marketing, website and so on. There is enough time after that have been done.
regards
exocoin
As for the chain async: The chains seems to be at any time 100% the same on all nodes. They "only" generate a different hash checksum from time to time (but then *all* are generating different results). So all transactions ever made should be in all chains on all nodes anyway. The bug is not that big as you might think.
Latest test showed that running a testnet without any initiated transactions does not reproduce the issue. So it can only be linked to initiated transactions or to (re)connects of peers.
Secondly, we would not had offered a "public review" / external input. However, many people would like to have that and, additionally, the bug is quite old without major progress, so we can understand that you want to have the final breakthrough on that issue. Anyway we try to solve it till the end of the weekend, as stated.
Let's just wait till we have finished our review of the code of the CTransaction, CBlock and CChain code parts. A professional external review of everything would take too much time. That is not an option for us.
Thirdly, we do want to finish the product first (well finish in terms of having a solid, working client) before marketing, website and so on. There is enough time after that have been done.
regards
exocoin
Must be one of those bugs that you take 99% of the time (days) to find and 1% to settle.
I tested using 3 VMs here since yesterday. I did a macro to click the "generate 10,000" button.
It took a few minutes but then everything synced without error.
Thanks and good luck
June 20, 2014, 01:28:36 PM
Look at ntp and the block sizes should be the same size, nodes should also use ping to show that they are responding.
if there are no txs then why does it need to create blocks?
if there are no txs then why does it need to create blocks?
June 20, 2014, 12:54:53 PM
still working on the bug.
As for the chain async: The chains seems to be at any time 100% the same on all nodes. They "only" generate a different hash checksum from time to time (but then *all* are generating different results). So all transactions ever made should be in all chains on all nodes anyway. The bug is not that big as you might think.
Latest test showed that running a testnet without any initiated transactions does not reproduce the issue. So it can only be linked to initiated transactions or to (re)connects of peers.
Secondly, we would not had offered a "public review" / external input. However, many people would like to have that and, additionally, the bug is quite old without major progress, so we can understand that you want to have the final breakthrough on that issue. Anyway we try to solve it till the end of the weekend, as stated.
Let's just wait till we have finished our review of the code of the CTransaction, CBlock and CChain code parts. A professional external review of everything would take too much time. That is not an option for us.
Thirdly, we do want to finish the product first (well finish in terms of having a solid, working client) before marketing, website and so on. There is enough time after that have been done.
regards
exocoin
As for the chain async: The chains seems to be at any time 100% the same on all nodes. They "only" generate a different hash checksum from time to time (but then *all* are generating different results). So all transactions ever made should be in all chains on all nodes anyway. The bug is not that big as you might think.
Latest test showed that running a testnet without any initiated transactions does not reproduce the issue. So it can only be linked to initiated transactions or to (re)connects of peers.
Secondly, we would not had offered a "public review" / external input. However, many people would like to have that and, additionally, the bug is quite old without major progress, so we can understand that you want to have the final breakthrough on that issue. Anyway we try to solve it till the end of the weekend, as stated.
Let's just wait till we have finished our review of the code of the CTransaction, CBlock and CChain code parts. A professional external review of everything would take too much time. That is not an option for us.
Thirdly, we do want to finish the product first (well finish in terms of having a solid, working client) before marketing, website and so on. There is enough time after that have been done.
regards
exocoin
June 20, 2014, 10:56:45 AM
Just a hunch. Can be useful or not.
I remembered something during tests. I clicked intensely. Many times, on the "Generate 10,000 exo" button, to raise the value generated.
This is a special transaction for test, right? Is it not the cause of the bug?
I remembered something during tests. I clicked intensely. Many times, on the "Generate 10,000 exo" button, to raise the value generated.
This is a special transaction for test, right? Is it not the cause of the bug?
it is a known bug that large blocks are difficult to transfer between clients in blockchain, i think they are fixing this.
i remember a recent beta where the chain worked fine for days till big blocks were made.
June 20, 2014, 09:36:02 AM
Just a hunch. Can be useful or not.
I remembered something during tests. I clicked intensely. Many times, on the "Generate 10,000 exo" button, to raise the value generated.
This is a special transaction for test, right? Is it not the cause of the bug?
I remembered something during tests. I clicked intensely. Many times, on the "Generate 10,000 exo" button, to raise the value generated.
This is a special transaction for test, right? Is it not the cause of the bug?
June 20, 2014, 09:30:05 AM
I'm really wondering what you are doing DEV??
You have more then 200 BTC from investments.
-You still didn't launch the coin.
-No represantive website
-No good marketing plan.
-Still not hired people to do this kind of things.
I really support you as an investor of eXo, but I really would like to see this above things starting to speed up and that you hire somebody who can do the marketing and that you pay someone to build a good design and website. You have enough BTC to do this...
Well for the rest keep up the good work with fixing the bugs and I hope you can deliver a good product in each aspect soon, not only the wallet but everything around as well.
Thanks
You have more then 200 BTC from investments.
-You still didn't launch the coin.
-No represantive website
-No good marketing plan.
-Still not hired people to do this kind of things.
I really support you as an investor of eXo, but I really would like to see this above things starting to speed up and that you hire somebody who can do the marketing and that you pay someone to build a good design and website. You have enough BTC to do this...
Well for the rest keep up the good work with fixing the bugs and I hope you can deliver a good product in each aspect soon, not only the wallet but everything around as well.
Thanks
+1
+1
The new logo and the site should come before the release and distribution. And adding eXo in an exchange should come before they start mining.
June 20, 2014, 09:11:03 AM
I'm really wondering what you are doing DEV??
You have more then 200 BTC from investments.
-You still didn't launch the coin.
-No represantive website
-No good marketing plan.
-Still not hired people to do this kind of things.
I really support you as an investor of eXo, but I really would like to see this above things starting to speed up and that you hire somebody who can do the marketing and that you pay someone to build a good design and website. You have enough BTC to do this...
Well for the rest keep up the good work with fixing the bugs and I hope you can deliver a good product in each aspect soon, not only the wallet but everything around as well.
Thanks
You have more then 200 BTC from investments.
-You still didn't launch the coin.
-No represantive website
-No good marketing plan.
-Still not hired people to do this kind of things.
I really support you as an investor of eXo, but I really would like to see this above things starting to speed up and that you hire somebody who can do the marketing and that you pay someone to build a good design and website. You have enough BTC to do this...
Well for the rest keep up the good work with fixing the bugs and I hope you can deliver a good product in each aspect soon, not only the wallet but everything around as well.
Thanks
Jump to: