What?

3 times wrong. The build process has been documented and has been using GPL tools for more than a year now, as has been posted just 2 pages back in this thread:
 https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/73651.msg1635477#msg1635477

It has also been successfully transposed (and further documented) in another bitcoin project in the meantime:
 https://github.com/JahPowerBit/BoottleXCP_binaries

I even offered free hands-on training sessions to anyone interested.
There was no response to that offer, though.

Not a problem, since my builds are not the "official" ones, as has been made abundantly clear by the OP more than 2 years ago.
Also please adopt a more standard git branching model to reduce version number confusion.
  See: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/

Otherwise you just make all your users subject to potentially catastrophic bugs.


I'm really not trying to hide my identity very hard (never used any VPN/Tor, reused my username across several sites, etc). A little google-fu is all it takes. Also, did you suddenly forget that you were keeping your online persona anonymous for years, until only a couple weeks ago?


I see no need to make such a demeaning post without doing some basic reading and engaging in private discussion first. This is disappointing.

Sorry, I was not aware of that.
I was not notified that you changed your build method.

I do not watch this thread closely, and you never proposed to add your new build method to the official git repository.
It remains that you have been distributing builds made using a non-disclosed build method until last year, effectively violating the licence, and violating my copyright.

Yes, it is a problem because your version numbers suggest that your builds are somehow "more advanced", while in fact you are exposing users to code that is not ready for production.

What did you expect? that I would thank you for violating the GPL and for making anonymous releases ahead of time?
I did engage in private discussions a few years ago, and at that time you were not willing to publish your build method.

Electrum has since become very popular, and large amounts of money are at stake.
I feel that have the obligation to protect users against malware.

I think you are misinterpreting. I was never encouraging a violation of the licence.
On the contrary, I was asking you to publish your build method, so that other developers would be able to redo the same builds.
The fact that I did ask nicely, and using private messages, does not mean that I was encouraging the violation in any way; that is only your interpretation.

It is true that I was hoping to use your work in order to expand the "market share" of Electrum, but not the way you think.
I was not interested in your binaries per se, I was interested in the build method, so that I, or someone else, could redo the same binaries.
And there is nothing wrong with that, this is exactly what the GPL is for!
The GPL was written in order to prevent computer code written by A to become dependent on B because B refuses to share their modifications.

However, you did not comply with my request at that time, apparently because you were using a commercial package that prohibits this use.
Since you refused to comply, I decided to use other builds made with Wine, and to stop linking to your website.
I believe that it was the right thing to do, even if it took developers a lot of time to create these Wine builds.

Since then, you apparently managed to change your build method in a way that complies with the GPL, and you posted your new method on march 2013.
I am sorry, but I did not know about that until recently. I hope that new method can be added to the project.

I know this is an odd request but we've managed to build an electrum server for myriad (multi-pow 5 concurrent algorythms sha scrypt skein groestl and qubit) but we're having trouble building a windows client ... could any of you fine gentlemen offer us a hand ? We'd appreciate it greatly.