Jeremy Rand

I think we should probably handle this in layers. Something like this: `walletcreatenameofferpsbt` would accept the following params: 1. `name`, the name identifier. 2. `amount`, the amount of the trade...

> Is that actually something we want in Namecoin Core? You can already do all that with the raw transaction API. I think it would be better to handle using...

Regarding PSBT API improvements, here's one that we can do on our end: #361

@yanmaani What's the status on this; is anything in Bitcoin Core blocking work on this?

Thanks for pointing out that UX issue @redarmyfaction , I've filed https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/issues/521 and https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/issues/522 . (No idea why those weren't already filed.) Please use those issues for discussing that UX...

FWIW I asked Ryan whether "hash" or "commitment" is a better term cryptographically, and they said "commitment" is preferred. They also said that "commitment hash" might be even better, but...

Blocked by https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/pull/484

Is this still a thing given https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/commit/8ae9d314e9af7bcce1e8bc52f0317b9d565109bf ?

@brandonrobertz: > One thing I noticed is that the first test (https://travis-ci.org/namecoin/namecoin-core/jobs/295544697) seems to always fail in Travis, but it succeeds local. Something about not being able to find certain...

Reviewing cc1d2af330ca2275868cca0e960f1c531d736ed2 merged into 3cdcfe7df8b7565171b4a53b13729c261378227d: * "Expires in" column in "Manage Names" tab doesn't mention whether a name operation is currently pending for the name. E.g. if you renew a...