Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Ok, I understand the problem. I'm used to press back anyways, but there are
users that press "home" notoriously, not noticing that they just put apps into
the background.
I think this could be solved by an "autofinish" parameter into the
SendCoinsActivity. I'm not sure when it should finish: Immediately after
sending, or after receiving back the tx from a number of other peers?
Original comment by andreas....@gmail.com
on 5 Aug 2013 at 1:46
As to when it should finish, that's a good question:
On the one hand, from a responsiveness point-of-view, it ought to finish as
quickly as possible, provided that doing so does not impair the propagation of
the transaction. Making the user wait unnecessarily for anything is bad form.
Furthermore, from a client-developer point-of-view, the comments to
`requestForResult()` in the `BitcoinIntegration.java` file read, "A success
indication is no guarantee," and warn not to rely on bitcoin-wallet as a
guarantee of propagation, so a client-developer already seems to be on notice
that bitcoin-wallet did not wait around to make certain the transaction has
propagated.
On the other hand, the client-developer is using bitcoin-wallet to offload some
of the burden of initiating a transaction, and maybe confirming successful
propagation or displaying to the user an error message upon failure ought to be
part of what is provided to the client-app. If so, bitcoin-wallet ought to
display an indeterminate ProgressBar while waiting to hear from peers in order
that the user knows something is happening in the background.
Perhaps client-developers ought to be given a choice of when the
SendCoinsActivity will exit? The most important thing is that control be
returned to the app that requested the payment and that the developer of that
app knows what is guaranteed to have occurred prior to the moment when
`onActivityResult()` has been invoked. Responsiveness of the user-interface
seems to be a close second priority, though perhaps I'm not aware of all the
costs of that trade-off.
Original comment by adammack...@gmail.com
on 5 Aug 2013 at 4:39
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
adammack...@gmail.com
on 4 Aug 2013 at 3:55