Coin naming standards and delisting process

[smk762]

Going through the coins file, there are a few inconsistencies which could be fixed to help with future maintenance. e.g.

• BEP-20 (and other platform/protocols) tokens should have a -BEP20 suffix (or -ERC20; -SLP etc)
• There is no consistent tagging of testnet coins. Suggest using a (test) suffix in fname.
• Not all coins have an fname value, and there might be other entries missing standard values.
• Due to the way the price service operates, any chars after the first - in the coin value will return the same price. For this reason, no coin should use a - in their name except to indicate it's platform/protocol. Instead, use an _. For example, a test coin named NAME on the BNB testnet would be NAME_TEST-BEP20

Changing the coin name value will be a breaking change for DEX apps which use a supplementary coins file for activation, so this update needs to be done in a carefully coordinated manner at a time where it wont impact any imminent deadlines for releases / demonstrations etc.

We're also lacking a clear delisting process / cycle. Something similar to https://github.com/KomodoPlatform/atomicDEX-Desktop/issues/1993 should also be applied here.

cc: @ologunB @yurii-khi @artemii235

[smk762]

Coins with non-responsive electrums to be added to delisting schedule:

• CIPHS (@ciphs ciphscoin@ciphs.org)
• DUST (no contact info)
• GMS (GMSmining#5499)
• IC (@AIexander | @Mercurious1)
• LTFN (@ mraksoll4 | mraksoll#0596 | mraksoll@gmail.com)
• PIC (no contact)
• GRMS (@Miner113 | miner113#7864)
• USDI (confirmed inactive)
• VOTE2022 (confirmed inactive)
• CHUNG (confirmed inactive)

[michelvankessel]

USDI can be delisted. The project seems to be dead

[alamshafil]

CHUNG can be removed; development and support has been stagnant.

[smk762]

There are a few considerations which should inform the standard:

• external API/services ticker recognition
• Internal price service parsing
• stats parsing
• apps filtering
• effects on api (if any)

Currently we use _ to deliniate the coins in a pair ('KMD_LTC'), and - o deliniate the coin ticker and its protocol `KMD-BEP20).

There are a couple of exceptions:

• USDC-PLG20_OLD
• DGB-segwit
• ATOM-IBC_IRIS

Each of these adds an additional challenge to parsing a pair into its constituent coins/platforms, and ideally should be changed and similar cases avoided.

For test coins, we also have a variety of formats: MATICTEST, tBCH, AVAXT, DOC. Though less critical, it would be nice to use a consistent standard here too. The convention appears to be a t prefix, so the above would be tMATIC, tBCH, tAVAX, tDOC. This way a user knows something is a testcoin on sight.

[cipig]

we could also use TEST and OLD in the ticker itself... thing is that this would prevent price fetching, so if we would have done that with USDC, like USDCOLD-PLG20, this coin would not have a price... normally it's fine since OLD means "not used any more", but in this case it is not true... idk though how important this aspect is trades with those coins would also not show up on paprika and gecko, USDC-PLG20_OLD does show up as USDC anyway, some examples:

• USDCOLD-PLG20
• BTCTEST

or we put OLD and TEST in front... depends how apps sort all this coins and tokens in the "enable coin" thing if they sort by ticker alphabetically, all TEST and OLD coins would be in one place... for TEST it would be perfect, for OLD not so

[cipig]

https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/tbtc would use ticker TBTC, same as BTC testnet i propose to rename all testnet coins to BTCTEST or TESTBTC, i prefer TESTBTC

[smk762]

a TEST prefix is preferable for simplicity of extraction