libdohj VS dogecoin

#2758 that removes a potential spam problem in the p2p protocol needs testing with libdohj to make sure that we don’t accidentally exclude wallets built upon that library from the network.

The technical problem to solve is to have a means to translate implicit on-chain transaction events to webhook calls (tx received, tx confirmed, # confirmations, tx got reorg'd). For my pilot, I used block.io because /u/kindoge has made a very reliable webhook mechanism so I didn't have to code that from scratch. If you need a full sovereign solution, I think that besides doing it on Dogecoin Core, something can be built into dogecoin-spv-node (js) or create a custom thing with libdohj (java) (perhaps until /u/xanimo-net is further along with libdogecoin and gives you a php sdk 😁).

Pruning works well, you don't need any patches for that and can just use 1.14.5. You can also use dogecoin-node-spv or build something with libdohj for an spv client.

You may want to take a look at https://github.com/dogecoin/libdohj for java / android.

I've not had time to do much with it recently, but is https://github.com/dogecoin/libdohj the sort of thing you're looking for to get started?

Multidoge is depreciated though, someone should build a new light wallet based on https://github.com/dogecoin/libdohj - that's a nice starter project because that offers a lot of the harder crypto already solved.

Libdohj the backbone for many Java implementations of Dogecoin wallets, based from this. Shows not only work but a full pushed update less than two weeks ago.

1.21 I think is on pause for now, the last tag ( https://github.com/rnicoll/dogecoin/tree/v1.21.0-2021-09-18 ) is pretty damn complete, but it needs a huge QA process which is the challenge. Instead there's more of a focus on keeping 1.14.x stable and secure, which is a lot less likely to cause issues (such as the Binance one where transactions which had been stuck were suddenly unstuck).

If you want to help testing, I'm tagging my work in progress frequently: https://github.com/rnicoll/dogecoin/tree/v1.21.0-2021-09-18 - there's still a couple of broken tests after adjusting the fees, but this mostly works. I'd particularly appreciate testing of:

Do you want to look at recent changes on https://github.com/rnicoll/dogecoin/tree/1.21-sync-up-to-auxpow and see if you can figure why there's a failing test? I'm kind of pointing everyone at this, but it's a good example of the work I'm doing https://github.com/dogecoin/dogecoin/issues/1921

For 1.17 I did actually fairly much smush Dogecoin Core 1.14 onto Bitcoin Core 0.17 and got somethat fairly viable ( https://github.com/rnicoll/dogecoin/tree/1.17-dev-sync-tests-alert ), but it's rough, and certainly not... like... I feel comfortable letting people run a $5bn coin off it.

Shadows linger a developers personal repository, but oddly this seems to look like work towards 1.17.