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

Why is getinfo being removed? #11382

Closed
thequillmagazine opened this issue Sep 21, 2017 · 8 comments

Comments

@thequillmagazine
Copy link

@thequillmagazine thequillmagazine commented Sep 21, 2017

"WARNING: getinfo is deprecated and will be fully removed in 0.16. Projects should transition to using getblockchaininfo, getnetworkinfo, and getwalletinfo before upgrading to 0.16",

Why? This command gives me a concise summary of the running node. getnetworkinfo is too detailed, getwalletinfo doesn't apply, and getblockchainifo is a redundant command. Why force the use of three commands (that already exist) when one command is doing good? I've never understood this principal.

@promag

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@promag promag commented Sep 21, 2017

See #8780 for further details.

@jnewbery

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@jnewbery jnewbery commented Sep 21, 2017

From PR #8780:

Some of the more serious problems with it are:

  • It combines information from different subsystems (wallet, networking, blockchain, ...), so its implementation is messy by definition and has to lock all over the place
  • It is ill-defined and without focus - what information should be added, what shouldn't
  • It behaves differently with and without wallet (and what should it do with multiple wallets)

It basically still exists as a convenience for people using bitcoin-cli manually

There is an open PR #10871 to implement getinfo in the bitcoin-cli client. If you find bitcoin-cli getinfo useful I recommend you review that PR to help it get merged.

@thequillmagazine

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

@thequillmagazine thequillmagazine commented Sep 21, 2017

@jnewbery I'm using the bitcoin-cli client, I'll take a look at the code. Thanks for the instant reply!

@kangasbros

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@kangasbros kangasbros commented Sep 28, 2017

Why not leave it for legacy purposes, what's the harm? Much code probably uses this command. It can be put to deprecated list or something, but I don't really understand the argumentation of removing it entirely.

@sipa

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@sipa sipa commented Sep 28, 2017

@kangasbros Guaranteeing that its output remains consistent will become increasingly difficult as subsystems (wallet and blockchain, in particular) become more independent.

@kangasbros

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@kangasbros kangasbros commented Sep 29, 2017

Maybe leave the fields out that are difficult to keep consistent? I can't believe leaving the whole function outright out is the best decision.

@sipa

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@sipa sipa commented Sep 29, 2017

If we have to break backward compatibility anyway, what is the point in keeping it? Anything relying on it needs to change anyway.

Also see #10871 to still get the convenience for users who want a quick overview.

@fanquake

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@fanquake fanquake commented Oct 7, 2017

Closing, this is happening and has been explained sufficiently.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
6 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.