darosior
Migrate to `secp256k1-py`
First to test https://github.com/rustyrussell/secp256k1-py and then to get rid of coincurve.
What is the motivation for this? Is coincurve not safe? secp256k1-py readme says it is experimental?
@darosior
Coincurve is a decent, well maintained alternative to the previously unmaintained libsecp256k1 package.
Rusty recently took over the maintenance of this package. Once it is stable, i'd rather use it as it's closer to the original library (intersection of the sets of contributors of both projects is larger). Also see this.
That said, there is no rush. Coincurve works well for us. I'll wait for secp256k1-py to be more widely used before making any change here.
secp256k1-py readme says it is experimental?
I think you are confused. The libsecp256k1 labels itself as experimental (although it is the basis of an almost trillion-dollar worth monetary system) and that seems to be what you are referring to. Both coincurve and secp256k1-py are bindings to this "experimental" library.
@darosior @jemshit Please revisit the assertions made above.
coincurve (master, yet to be pushed to pypi) is actively maintained and tracking fairly decently the updates made by the bitcoin-core maintainers of the secp256k1 C library, (recently updated to v0.4.0 while coincurve is tracking v0.3.2 not impacted by the changes in 0.4.0 - new features)
Recently, I have worked on a couple of conda-forge recipe for both secp256k1 C library (called libsecp256k1) and coincurve. coincurve=18.0.0 conda package is directly compatible with the latest libsecp256k1=0.4.0.
@darosior I have also prepared a conda-recipe for python-bip32. It is pending review of the coincurve recipe. Are you interested in being a maintainer for that recipe?