►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
B
Basically,
our
biggest
task
is
currently
just
to
set
up,
let's
say
parallel
API
handling,
so
for
our
currently
only
one
for
our
current
ADA
implementation,
so
we're
currently
extending
that
to
also
support
et
Cie,
and
we
have
been
implementing
several
of
API
endpoints,
for
example,
the
ones
which
fetch
the
accounts
and
account
balances,
as
well
as
creating
a
new
new
accounts.
So
that's
currently
the
current
scope
of
our
work,
so
we
have
been
able
to
create
all
this
structure
and
it
currently
works
pretty
good.
B
Of
course,
there
are
some
things
that
we
are
still
missing.
There
are
also
some
differences
between
the
e.t.c
and
ADA
API,
for
example,
on
either
side
we
have
wallets
with
wallet
names
which
are
stored
on
the
API
level,
and
we
don't
have
such
thing
as
as
far
as
I
know
for
etc'.
So
these
are
kind
of
tasks
that
we
need
to
handle
within
the
journals
itself.
So
because
we
need
names
or
let's
count
names
in
order
to
display
and
run
the
UI
as
we
currently
do
for
DEA
decide.
So
that's
pretty
much
it
not
sure.
A
B
That
was
like
our
first
idea
and
then
we
decided
to
actually
use
the
ID
or
the
key,
as
you
know,
logic
where
we
use
key
value
pairs
so
ID
and
then
some
custom
name
that
we
show
in
in
the
UI,
because,
for
example,
when
you
try
to
create
a
new
wallet,
you
account
in
between
the
Devils
you
always
have
to.
You
know
you
have
to
enter
the
name
and
we
display
the
name
in
a
lot
of
many
places.
So
it's
kind
of
more
appropriate
to
use
something
which
user
can.
B
You
know
better
recognize
as,
for
example,
I.
Don't
know,
maybe
something
like
my
private
wallet
or
shopping
wallet
or
whatever
so,
and
the
other
thing
is
that
usually
the
custom
names
are
quite
shorter
than
the
wallet,
then
the
account
keys.
So
that's
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
decided
to
move
along
with
creating
our
own
custom
implementation
within
the
metals
application.
A
B
Well,
it's
hard
to
kind
of
estimate
how
much
work
it
will
take,
but
yeah
we'll
probably
have
more
correct
overview
by
the
end
of
next
week,
because
by
that
time,
we'll
probably
sort
out
most
of
the
UI
related
issues
so
to
just
to
cover
the
gap
between
the
API
differences
from
the
ADA
in
the
EDC
and
once
we
sorted
out,
then
we'll
have
a
let's
say
much
clearer
view
or
vision
of
what
we
else
need
to
do
so,
basically
going
step
by
step.
You
know
just
like
creating
transactions,
loading,
transaction,
etc.
B
A
B
A
Nicholas,
you
were
actually
looking
at.
You
managed
to
get
back
and
look
at
some
of
the
the
installer
code.
That's
there
can
he
let
us
know
and
that's
gone
in.
C
It,
yes,
yes,
that's
right,
I've
been
a
bullet
for
somebody.
Looking
at
during
this
week,
some
issues
we
do
have
that
we
detected
a
that.
There
was
a
missing
null
in
our
database
missing,
MPT,
no
and
due
to
that
with
Alain
Bernard,
we
were
taking
a
look
at
both
level
difficult
on
how
we
handle
the
murk
padishah
tree,
and
we
detected
several
issues
related
to
that
and
we
there
are
only
two
purpose
regarding
that
and
we'll
probably
open
a
third
one
that
we
are
currently
testing.
C
C
It
for
support
when
reversing
instead
of
fussing
and
I've
been
doing
some
modifications
in
today
that
allows
installers
was
this
was
to
exchange
the
cardinal
client
with
mantis
plant
and
that's
in
community
continuing
to
working
on
that
and
changing
the
the
launcher
script
that
that
also
told
us
that
when
she's,
both
the
corona
client
and
that
all
spent
the
the
Alice
word
to
start
the
multiscreen.
If
there's
a
okay.
A
A
You
know
it's
good
that
you're
familiar
with
it
and
were
able
to
make
some
changes
to
it,
so
that
should
sort
of
ease
the
process
when
we
get
there
and
then
the
second
thing
you're
working
on
it
was
just
trying
to
fix,
find
and
fix
some
of
the
the
bugs
in
level
TB,
leveldb
I
think
he
said
there
was
three
or
no
one
was
in
one
was
in
compaction
and
there's
another.
Maybe
Allen
could.
Could
you
fill
us
in
on
the
rest
of
that
Hey.
D
Yes,
sir,
and
as
you
said,
the
first
issue
might
be
within
the
compaction
process.
We
are,
we
have
deployed
our
fix
and
we
are
running
some
tests,
but
we
are
not
hundred
percent
percent
sure
it's
related
to
compaction
or
not.
It
seems
to
be
working
fine
now,
so
it's
a
good
sign.
Also.
We
found
an
issue
in
our
medical
Patricia
tree
implementation.
It
was
a
super
rare
case
and
it
was
only
happening
in
box
them.
D
So
when
we
started
executing
on
that,
a
in
that
Network,
we
found
the
level
DV
error
and
this
one
so
the
American
Patricia
tree
is
already
fixed.
There
is
a
book
request,
open
and
with
one
Apple
one,
and
so
it's
waiting
for
the
other
one
and
it
will
be
merged
and
they
never
knew
me.
Yes,
I
just
said
it's
running
on
ec2
instances,
and
hopefully
we'll
have
good
news
for
next
week.
Yeah.
A
I
think
that
Sam,
as
he
said,
it's
been
running
out
for
a
while,
with
with
no
errors
for
the
course
that's
no
guarantee.
We
won't
find
an
error,
but
it's
certainly
I
think
better
than
it
was
before
and
it
wasn't
terrible
before
either
so,
let's
see
if
we
can
get
through
the
entire
regular,
sync
and
I
think
we'll
be
close
to
the
to
the
end
of
you
know
some
of
those
more
scary,
leveldb
bugs
okay,
thanks
Alan,
and
so
then,
on
the
other
end
of
things
we
were
trying,
we
were.
A
E
Like
forth,
I'm,
not
sure
yeah,
at
least
goodbye
yeah,
it's
been
done
for
some
time
now.
However,
of
course,
being
quite
a
large
change
needed
to
go
through
deep
with
you
and
and
yes
that
happens,
one
of
the
more
important
changes
that
came
out
from
this
review
was
that
we
saw
necessity
for
adding
certain
form
of
foundation.
E
E
It
doesn't
limit
the
functionality
in
any
way.
However,
without
it
we
are
possibly
vulnerable
to
a
specific
sort
of
spam
attack
so
anyway
that
the
task
has
been
planned
and
will
commence
soon
anyway.
The
major
thing
is
that
the
most
potent
thing
here
is
that
the
the
new
functionality
and
it's
a
recent
factor,
but
also
a
bit
of
new
functional
functionality.
So
that's
done.
We
are
able
to
handle
more.
E
Situations
during
during
syncing,
and
also
we
are
able
to
run
certain
certain
groups
of
blockchain
tests
from
the
interim
tests.
We
don't
require
a
chain
reorganization,
so
apart
from
that,
I
also
have
been
working
last
week
on
implementing
a
IP
stick
684.
This
is
about
handling
collisions
while
creating
contracts.
So
both
these
tasks
together
enable
us
to
around
the
whole
suite
of
blockchain
tests,
except,
of
course,
for
the
metropolis
fork,
which
is
not
support
yet
but
yeah.
E
A
Yeah,
doesn't
okay
cool
thanks,
Rick
I'm,
trying
to
create
a
tenuous
link
here,
but
you
mentioned
the
block,
validation
and
the
tenuous
link
there,
because
actually
Lucas
you
were
looking
at
the
at
sunblock
validation
right.
Yes,.
G
That's
right.
Currently,
we
only
have
a
kind
of
simplified
version
of
group
of
all
validation,
in
my
could
request
that
I
have
played
the
yesterday
I
implemented
the
full
validation
using
the
hash
algorithm
and
that
currently
awaits
code
reviews
ones
that
merged
it
still
needs
few
minor
adjustments.
G
One
of
those
is
handling
the
generated
cash
for
given
a
box
so
that
we
don't
have
to
regenerate
it
when
there
is
change
organization
or
the
other
minor
task
is,
should
try
to
improve
performance
because
currently
it
flows
down
our
sink
process.
So
these
are
the
follow-up
tasks
of
this
one,
but
the
main
algorithm
is
ready.
Yeah.
A
Excellent,
the
nuts
I
mean,
as
we've
discussed.
That's
definitely
the
right
way
to
do.
It
is
just
try
and
get
that
main
algorithm
and
then
put
in
those
those
follow-up
requests
so
that
the
that
we
keep
the
peor
is
relatively
small
and,
of
course,
say.
My
first
thought
when
it
comes
to
you
know.
The
performance
slowdown
as
a
result
of
the
validation
is
that
we
should
include
a
flag
just
to
turn
it
off,
but.
G
A
F
Finished
working
on
separating
incoming
piercing
tool
can
shakespeare's
and
pending
pierce
was
already
merged,
and
now
I'm
working
on
and
who
blockhouses
messages
in
our
code.
Most
of
the
logic
is
implemented
now
I'm
testing
it
and
want
to
speed
up
to
top
of
the
chain
to
have
the
most
valuable
testing
done.
Yeah.
A
F
A
Okay,
cool
so
I
guess
just
in
general
terms
with
where
we're
going.
We
have
this
there's
been
quite
a
few
follow-up
tasks
generated
as
a
result
of
some
of
the
improvements,
I
think
most
of
the
bugs
and
things
that
we
found
specifically
the
leveldb
ones,
I
think
are
sorted
out.
So
we
have
a
few
POS
that
are
related
to
the
to
the
etherium
test.
Suite
changes.
We
have
a
few
new
bits
of
functionality
and
then
we
have
the
follow-up
tasks
and
of
course
we
have
Daedalus
integration.
So
we're
probably
you
know
this.
A
This
would
be
the
height
of
I,
guess
the
the
the
maximum
amount
of
change
is
going
on.
Probably
now
so
what
we'd
like
to
do
is
start
to
merge
those
and
see
that
taper
off
with
a
view
to
getting
back
to
doing
a
full,
a
full
sweep
of
the
test
and
trying
to
get
some
kind
of
candidate
together
for
a
Daedalus
release.
So
again,
we've
said
it.
A
You
know,
we've
said
it
a
couple
of
times
now,
just
because
there
are
some
some
factors
that
we
just
can't
control,
but
that
is
the
general
plan
and
I
think
in
the
near
term,
we'll
be
able
to
talk
about
when
we
can.
We
can
get
that
candidate
together
and
okay.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
on
any
of
that?