My internet connection is great, but the status is not Active. It’s been like this for 3 months, I can’t access my grin++ wallet
3 Likes
2 Likes
Is Grin++ not recommended anymore?
2 Likes
Grin++ has issues with network peering
1 Like
I’m also interested to know why Grim is now being recommended. Seems like a coup.
I have the same peer problem on Grin++, need to resync the node every time, and sometimes it didn’t work. On GRIM, I no longer have this issue, everything works perfectly, even though I prefer the UI of Grin++
So, the real question is, why has the CC decided to cut funding for Grin++ when many of us like it, and have been using it for years.
I don’t like to be forced to use something(Grim), especially when you cut off something that I was using and was happy with.
@011 There have been multiple request and invitations to both @davidtavarez and @david to continue development. In particular to further fix issues with peers and implement PIBD.
Some, including myself persistently experience issues with peers (no peers and few grin rust peers, probably because of over active banning).
Appart from these reported issues, Grin++ works fine. Its UI is clean, userfriendly and Grin++ has unique features such as coin control (you can select which outputs to use), new slatepack generation for extra privacy, and the best support for running a node and wallet in countries with sensorship using bridges.
No one forces anything and there is no coup, just free choice. Because of the peer issues (partly caused by lack of PIBD support) me and probably more Grin users are now inclined to advice Grim wallet over Grin++ to new users. I can only hope some of the Grin++ developers will be willing to fix these last issues with Grin++ as we have proposed many times to them. Community Council members (CC) can only suggest, request and make funding available. In other words, we can only facilitate. If developers are not willing, there is nothing we can do about that unfortunately. I have good hopes that both Davids will recognize this issue and will make time available to work at it at some point since it is a waste to have a good project like Grin++ lose traction 
.
3 Likes
I’m not sure about any “invitation”, I haven’t receive any of it. Anyways, it would be good to keep developing Grin++. At least the intention to fix the issue with peers is there. I haven’t completely ruled out the possibility of going back to write code for Grin++.
3 Likes
@davidtavarez I consider this an open invitation:
keybase://chat/grincoin#community/550
Yep, Grin++ works fine and if that issue with peers would be resolved, or better PIBD be implemented for Grin++, it would simply work and Grin++ would not need much more work. Extra features like Nostr support would be fun, but basic functionality and stability is a must and the real essence of what Grin++ needs. Grin++ not having PIBD support makes PIBD less efficient and less decentralised since only half (or less) of all the nodes support it.
So @dburkett @dtavarez that Grin++ will get the bit of extra love that it needs and deserves.
If funding is needed, just let us know, we can arrange something via Funding Proposal by CC, Funding Request by developers, or any other method.
1 Like
By coup, I meant that funding was cut when Grim appeared. If this was not the case, I was only going by what was said:
I see @davidtavarez has replied, so hopefully something can be worked out. Grin ++ is used by many people and it makes absolutely no sense to not maintain it.
Please make the time available if you can. The Grin ++ wallet is used by many people and it’s important that it’s maintained. Wallets are the only thing I would vote for funding when there are not many people around. It’s foundational tech that is necessary to build and maintain.
1 Like
I see, may bad. I only used Keybase for Grin related issues, I hadn’t opened it in a while.
I agree.
1 Like
Most of the work done it seems according to @davidtavarez table.
Yep, mostly done but somethings not yet fully functioning. If I remember correctly the new (unified-)API was not yet safe. Also the peer issue was solved before (I think by linking to a lot of hard coded Grin++ nodes), but not yet a systematic solution such as PIBD to solve the ussue ones and for all.
Mostly correct. I ended up with a PR that was too big, introducing to many changes. Synchronisation was way better, but not stable enough. Didn’t merge because of it. I recently took a piece out of it and opened a pre-release Release Grin++ Wallet and Node v1.2.9 · GrinPlusPlus/GrinPlusPlus · GitHub
Before merging the changes, the PR should be disassemble into smaller pieces, around 5 o 6 and then merge them separately. After that, PIBD changes can be safely introduced.
1 Like
Hey David,
I had a question for you.
When I used to be in HNT space, I remember that my HNT miners would also take a long time to sync to the network due to its size. To speed this up, the manufacturer provided these “flashed image” files which would rapidly sync the HNT miner to the last snapshot on the file after which the miner would slowly sync back in due time.
Could something like that be possible with Grin too? It a file dump was used to sync to block “x” after which Grin++ would resume syncing until it’s caught up?