Open gary-rowe opened 9 years ago
I have a general implementation that allows a DKC to have an arbitrary account derivation path. Should I'll compare my implementation to yours and see which one makes more sense to create a PR out of?
(Cc @mikehearn)
It sounds similar. I found the serialisiing and deserialising of the wallets to be the least general part of the bitcoinj-alice code - not really good enough for a general purpose library.
Yes, I had the same experience, due to the use of static functions. Ended up with some factory classes to generalize.
The BIP44 support work is currently held in our Bitcoinj-Alice fork. It would be better if this work could be generalised and pushed upstream for other projects to benefit from.
This is a complex change and may require a lot of support work before a PR would be accepted upstream. For this reason it has to occur after the first release of the project.