Bible Pay

Read 561 times

  • Lichtsucher
  • Newbie

    • 35


    • 3
    • January 09, 2018, 03:27:09 am
    more
Idea for two proposals
« on: January 14, 2018, 01:06:07 pm »
Hi everyone,

after some time doing deeper into the project, I realized that there might be two thing that I can do that might be usefull for the project.
Both might be good proposals, got before I post them, I wanted to ask about your opinions.

1. Debian/Ubuntu packages
A lot of the current users seems to use Linux, and I assume a lot of them use debian or ubuntu, as it is with a lot of projects. While compiling is not super problematic, it might shy away some users, or limit there use.
There are some older parts for debian already in the project, but I played around with them, they do not seem to work properly anymore, plus there is no documentation. Plus a good project would provide an apt source for easier installation.
With cleanup, documentation and helping the devs to setup a apt source (sensible part, should be hosted/managed by the core team, I think), I thing it will be around 30-40 hours. Testing will take most of the time, I learned that the hard way in a previos project where I did the same ;)

2. Making a better pool software
The current pool seems to work most of the time, but the software is windows only, a little bit of a mess (mixed UI and Pool code), no documentation ...
My idea would be to write a core only, that means the part that speaks to the miners, plus an API that is used by the real ui (the current one?) to get the "numbers" (hashrate and so on). Orphan letters anhd so on would be separated. Plus writing a mini-ui for Pools that do not need the full features of the main pool.
The code would be written in a ways that is would be easy to understand, like a "documentation as code" ;)
I do not now how much time it will take, as it will require a lot of understanding of the current code, which is not that easy. I already followed everything from readytomine2 to solution taking and when the system tries to identify found blocks. But some lines are very cryptocoin specific, so I would need help from the code team.
I would asume that this would require around 40-50hours on my side, if the old code can be explained to me. I would use Python, with mysql or postgre as standard dbs, but we can try to make it mssql compatible, too.

What do you think, would it be usefull to create proposals out of one or two of these projects? Is that something worthy the time? And is it realistic that one of these is accepted as proposals?
Are proposals normaly accepted before the work begins, or after it is finished?


Re: Idea for two proposals
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2018, 11:40:04 pm »
Package Management would be handy to see.  I've never researched how to run a repository but would guess one drawback would be while we're still doing a lot of updates, that would be one more thing to manage and my concern would be the users that we'd reach that way would become discouraged if the package ran a few days behind.   Basically the users that probably should just use the windows client.  I've got on my plate to do a video on how to set up on Linux and really it's not that daunting if you cut and paste a lot.  Don't get me wrong though, a managed package would be great to see.

Pool Software is the big one.  It would be awesome to see a custom coin class built for https://github.com/MPOS/php-mpos which would then build upon the work of that pool software and not have to "reinvent the wheel".

As far as a proposal, I would first get with the Dev and make sure he has time to help with what you may need.  As far as when proposals are accepted, so far we've been working backwards, so most everything has been paying for completed work/activity.  Since you're new here, you might consider getting a decent part of the work done before submitting (if not the entire thing).  But getting discussion on if enough people think it's worth it is a great way to gauge the odds of getting compensated.

As for me, I'm far more keen on the Pool Software aspect then the Package Management, but would likely support either if the budget had room for it.


  • Lichtsucher
  • Newbie

    • 35


    • 3
    • January 09, 2018, 03:27:09 am
    more
Re: Idea for two proposals
« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2018, 02:19:46 am »
Hi 616westwarmoth,

thanks for your answer, that is already helping me.

About the deb-packages: You are right that the compiling isn't that complex, in fact is quite easy. But at the same time, it will discourage users, even I was nearly skipping biblepay because of that. It is an unrequired hassle, and I think a modern software should be as easy to use as possible. My target would be to make it as easy as possible for the devs to build and deploy these packages, with documentation and everything already solved, so that they will not days behind, but more or less available at the same time as the windows binaries.
I'm not sure that system the devs use for everyday work, windows or linux. Indeed, if all of them use Windows, building ubuntu packages would require a little bit more work, but that could be solved by a simple VM.


I also think that the pool software is more important, as it seems to be a real problem at the moment. What I would do first here is to documentate the existing protocol and most important functions. As I found out, biblebay has its own custom protocoll between the miner and the pool, so an existing pool software would need to be changed to use it.
I would prefer to write a standalone software from the start, as it would not only be a pool software, but also a reference implementation, that could be the source for other pool software. I think it would not solve a lot of problems, if the next standard pool software is even more complicated then the existing one.
But I'm very interessted in feedback about that, in anycase, we would need a good documentation, I think that should be the start for every step. And Indeed I would try to create one with the devs.

At the moment, I invested around 4 hours investigating the source code of the pool, with I will use as a base for a wiki page I try to start today. I also played around with the existing debian code in the client and found some problems there, but I was not sure if I should invest more time into the debian package or pool :) But as said, building the package for debian will not be the most problematic part there, I will take more time to test them and write the docs for the developers and users who want to compile it as debian package for them self.

About the budget: Both projects would be part of the IT budget. There do not seems to be that many projects there for the moment, is that right? Is there enough budget for these, I would calculate with 30 EUR/h.


Re: Idea for two proposals
« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2018, 11:16:17 am »
I'm just one voice and have to say unfamiliar with package management.  My only other thought (and this is not to discourage you) is that most users running Linux will want to compile it natively to achieve better performance as, and correct me if I misunderstand, a package is pre-compiled versus a generic target.  This would help VPS deployment (although mining on most VPS is against the TOS and simplifying things might bring more negative image to the coin for that one reason).   

On the pool, the reason I think a custom coin class for something like PHP_MPOS is better is because there are a good number of mining pools out there that support multiple coins.  Making it easy for a pool to add Biblepay would likely lead to quicker adoption as new software would, in my understanding, require them to run a new pool.  Multi-pools expose miners to new coins as there is a very low bar for them to try it out if they're already familiar with setting up for that particular pool.  This would also piggy-back on the knowledge base that exists for software such as this, and mean in a pinch, someone could quickly pop up a new pool if needed.  But I agree, a new pool package that could run on a standard Linux server would be valuable if the work could be done in a timely manner. 


  • jaapgvk
  • Hero Member

    • 587


    • 25
    • September 01, 2017, 08:02:57 pm
    • Netherlands
    more
Re: Idea for two proposals
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2018, 03:36:47 am »
Quote
Since you're new here, you might consider getting a decent part of the work done before submitting (if not the entire thing).  But getting discussion on if enough people think it's worth it is a great way to gauge the odds of getting compensated.

I agree with this :) I would be nice to see some code.

I think it would be great if biblepay could be mined in a multi-pool. I like both proposals actually. If it weren't for Togo's guided, I would be totally lost in installing a miner on linux. If there was a .deb package from the start, it would be much easier for new - less skilled - users. Also: we should do the same for OSX.