3 ms·
Actively used alternative implementations: https://github.com/btcsuite/btcd https://github.com/btcsuite/btcd https://bitcoin-s.org/ https://bitcoin-s.org/ ht
by thinkmassive 4y ago
Actively used alternative implementations:
https://github.com/btcsuite/btcd https://github.com/btcsuite/btcd
https://bitcoin-s.org/ https://bitcoin-s.org/
https://bcoin.io/ https://bcoin.io/
https://bitcore.io/ https://bitcore.io/
https://bitcoindevkit.org/ https://bitcoindevkit.org/
- kinakomochidayo 4y agoNone of these clients will likely ever compete with Bitcoin Core. https://coin.dance/nodes https://coin.dance/nodes
- thinkmassive 4y agoThey're clients, they interoperate. It isn't a competition. Some are more suitable for certain use cases, and all those listed are actively in use with real funds on the mainnet network. The site you linked is interesting, but it can only show public nodes. Edit: not to mention that a single node can serve huge numbers of light clients, e.g. one of those public btcd instances could be serving hundreds of neutrino clients
- kinakomochidayo 4y agoWhat I'm trying to say is that anybody who wants to implement new features not accepted by the Core maintainers will never catch on, precisely because the share of other clients being used is so low. A more distributed, equal % amongst all of the different clients would not only decrease the chance of critical issues with the main client implementation, but should also increase innovation, and make it easy for others to signal their support for that. Which is precisely why Core maintainers will likely see that as an "attack" on Bitcoin.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]