Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merge v1.3.8 #4528

Merged
merged 63 commits into from Sep 15, 2020
Merged

Merge v1.3.8 #4528

merged 63 commits into from Sep 15, 2020

Conversation

ripcurlx
Copy link
Member

@ripcurlx ripcurlx commented Sep 15, 2020

No description provided.

ripcurlx and others added 30 commits September 3, 2020 17:34
If we would add DisputeManager to previous structure it would cause a
circular dependency error from guice. We change dependency structure so
that TradeManager does not know XmrTxProofService but XmrTxProofService
gets an instance of TradeManager. It makes code cleaner in total as well
as responsibility is better defined.

Next commit will contain the DisputeManager addition.
If a mediation or arbitration dispute has been opened we do not use the
auto-confirm feature.
- Remove commented out code
- do isFiatReceived in stream filter
If users accept visible in mempool only txs its their own risk and they
can manually confirm anyway. We should not support 0 conf txs.
- make it xmr orange
- make with dynamic with 10 px padding left/right
- fix 1 px vertical offset
If --useDevModeHeader is not set it is false by default.
If user has --useDevMode=true set it would overwrite his value.
We do not wait until the offer got removed by a network remove message but remove it
directly from the offer book. The broadcast gets now bundled and has 2 sec. delay so the
removal from the network is a bit slower as it has been before. To avoid that the taker gets
confused to see the same offer still in the offerbook we remove it manually. This removal has
only local effect. Other trader might see the offer for a few seconds
still (but cannot take it).
Support agent can mark a suspicious dispute as resolved so it does not
show the alert icon anymore. In the full report a [ACK] got added to
that dispute.
For backward compatibility we need to exclude the new field for
the contract json.
We can remove that after a while when risk that users with
pre 1.3.8 version trade with updated
users is very low.
We apply userName to accountId if it is not set (e.g. new account
created with new version). We do not use that for display or for
account signing in case both fields are the same but we need to use
accountId in case the user trades with a not updated user who expects
accountId as only field.
I improved a bit the display of account data in the trade screens.
In case accountId was set with the phone number (updated account with
phone nr used for account signing) we show both userName and phone nr.

- Show phone number if accountId was set by old account. Otherwise
show only userName
- For old users they will see the user name as phone number displayed
if they trade with new users if the new user has created a new account.
If he has updated an existing account the accountId (phone number) is
used, so it displays the phone number.
- At step 2 changed display of own account data to show account name
- Add 'Recipients' prefix to account data of peer at step 2

Step 3: Buyers account data can be
- Phone number if peer is using old version
- User name if peer is updated user with new account (we apply userName
to accountId)
- Phone number if user is on old version and peer is updated user with
updated account (we keep accountId as phone number)
- User name/Phone number if peer is updated user with updated account
chimp1984 and others added 22 commits September 8, 2020 11:53
dispute has been opened. This will cause a Runtime exception but that
is justified as the caller need to ensure to do the check and do not
allow to get to that point.
…q/desktop/main/portfolio/pendingtrades/steps/seller/SellerStep3View.java
Avoid that a success result overwrites an earlier failed/error result.
The p2pNetworkAndWalletReady MonadicBinding might be removed from GC
if its a local variable. I observed that in BisqSetup with a similar
setup. It might be an implementation weakness in MonadicBinding
(usage of weak references?). A tester reported that he does not see any
result, which might be cause that the service never gets the
onP2pNetworkAndWalletReady triggered if the MonadicBinding is not there
anymore.
By removing the listener we need at shutdown we need it anyway as class
field (so codacy does not complain anymore). As well added a check if
all is already complete to skip the MonadicBinding at all
(not expected case in onAllServicesInitialized).
* If Tor *.onion hostname, use HTTP with Tor proxy
* If 127.0.0.1 or localhost, use HTTP without Tor proxy
* If LAN address or *.local FQDN, use HTTP without Tor proxy
* If any other FQDN hostname, use HTTPS with Tor proxy
moment we save the account. Only at that moment we check if we need to
set the accountId with the value of the userName.
We do that in the domain layer to avoid more domain logic code in the UI
layer.

Fixes bug found at:
#4481 (review)
@boring-cyborg boring-cyborg bot added in:altcoins is:no-priority PR or issue marked with this label is not up for compensation right now labels Sep 15, 2020
@ripcurlx ripcurlx changed the title <!-- - make yourself familiar with the CONTRIBUTING.md if you have not already (https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) - make sure you follow our [coding style guidelines][https://github.com/bisq-network/style/issues) - pick a descriptive title - provide some meaningful PR description below - create the PR - in case you receive a "Change request" and/or a NACK, please react within 30 days. If not, we will close your PR and it can not be up for compensation. - After addressing the change request, __please re-request a review!__ Otherwise we might miss your PR as we tend to only look at pull requests tagged with a "review required". --> Merge v1.3.8 Sep 15, 2020
….3.8

# Conflicts:
#	core/src/main/java/bisq/core/support/dispute/agent/MultipleHolderNameDetection.java
#	core/src/main/java/bisq/core/trade/txproof/xmr/XmrTxProofService.java
@ripcurlx ripcurlx requested a review from sqrrm September 15, 2020 11:24
Copy link
Member

@sqrrm sqrrm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK

@sqrrm sqrrm merged commit b2d6d81 into master Sep 15, 2020
@ripcurlx ripcurlx deleted the release/v1.3.8 branch October 8, 2020 07:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
in:altcoins is:no-priority PR or issue marked with this label is not up for compensation right now
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants