From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VBVsN-0006O2-66 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:16:31 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.215.51 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.51; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-la0-f51.google.com; Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com ([209.85.215.51]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VBVsM-0005XQ-Dg for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:16:31 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id es20so3667147lab.38 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 13:16:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.163.100 with SMTP id yh4mr1652428lab.31.1376943383640; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 13:16:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.89.72 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 13:16:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 13:16:23 -0700 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Frank F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1VBVsM-0005XQ-Dg Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:16:31 -0000 On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Frank F wrote: > If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be addressed > and fixed instead of outright abandoned. They have been, resulting in a replacement called "getblocktemplate" which (presumably) almost everyone talking to bitcoin(d|-qt) has been using for a long time. I think removing the ability to mine in the stock package would be regrettable, but to be honest we already don't have it for the mainnet. I think we should do as Jeff suggests and remove getwork. But I think we should also package along a proper getblocktemplate miner to remove any doubt that we're providing a full network node here. (I note that the choice of miner is also easy: Regardless of people's preferences which way or another, AFAIK only luke's bfgminer stuff can mine directly against bitcoin getblocktemplate with no pool in the middle. It also supports a huge variety of hardware, and a superset of our target platforms)