[mining] allow other signal listeners to provide scripts for mining #6481
Conversation
…overwritten This simple change would allow other wallets to providing a scripts for the coinbase output. Currently the main wallet will always overwrite a available script. Without this PR, RPC test for the new wallet would require to send in funds mined of ther current wallet.
|
utACK |
|
Seems strange to put this reponsibility in the wallet, as it means that probably every alternative provider for scripts would also need this logic. I think it's better to institute a rule that there can be at most one provider. You can probably easily implement that as a combiner for the boost signal, making it fail when more than one called handler returns true. That way it becomes the responsibility of the one who registers the providers, rather than of every provider itself. Not a NAK though, if this is the easiest solution, ok. |
|
What @sipa said. |
Yes, I had a similar comment. It's a bit strange to put the responsibility for not returning multiple scripts in the providers. The need for a circuitous design like this seems to indicate there is a level violation though. Maybe mining-to-wallet call should be part of the wallet API? Then there is no need to register anything at all. |
|
My proposal would be to move |
This simple change would allow other wallets/signal listeners to providing a scripts for the coinbase output. Currently the main wallet will always overwrite a possible available script.
Without this PR, RPC test for the new wallet would require to send in funds mined of ther current wallet.