The previous overloading of the term "close" to mean both settlement of the channel (broadcast of the final payment tx) and terminating/cleaning up the underlying network connection was very confusing and made the code harder to work with. The notion of "closing" a protocol that is often embedded inside others isn't really well defined, so there's perhaps more work to do here, but this change makes the code easier to follow and is basically a big pile of no-ops.
Extract out the "is time locked" risk analysis code to a pluggable implementation.
Ensure the default implementation has 100% test coverage.
Consider finality, not merely the presence of a lock time, when judging risk.
Don't consider a tx risky if it would become final in the next block.
Do not consider self-created transactions risky.
Now broadcast to half the connected peers immediately, and wait until half of the rest (i.e. a quarter) have announced the tx. This should give some robustness against a random subset of peers silently swallowing transactions.
This is useful for code that wants to make micropayments in a generic fashion, whilst being independent of whether the implementation is in-process using a local wallet, or perhaps running elsewhere (like inside an Android wallet app with communication happening using Binder RPC).
Add a new PAYMENT_ACK message to the protocol. Make incrementPayment return a future that completes when the server has acknowledge the balance increase.
Also, prevent users from overlapping multiple increase payment requests.
This resolves race conditions that can occur when the billed-for activity is asynchronous to the protocol in which the micropayment protocol is embedded. In this case, it was previously impossible to know when the async activity could be resumed as it would otherwise race with the process of the server checking the payment signature and updating the balance. Most applications of micropayments will use a single protocol that has been extended with an embedding, and thus this is not an issue. However in some rare applications the payment process may run alongside the existing protocol rather than inside it. In this case, payment acks should be used for synchronization.
1) TX confidence listeners were being run for chain height changes, even if they were not confirmed yet.
2) req.fee was being miscalculated for empty wallet transactions.
Backport misc improvements from PayFile.
Refactor the clickable address out into a custom widget.
Use FontAwesome and the wrapper class for icons instead of a custom image.
QRcode support.
Previously the PeerGroup itself would broadcast the pending transactions by simply sending an inv with them all to every peer. This is a good way to get a transaction blasted out if there are no problems with it, but it means we cannot track propagation and the numBroadcastPeers() value was correspondingly not increased. This seems to be causing issues with the Android wallet. So try out a different approach - have the wallet use broadcastTransaction as per normal on the PeerGroup when it's added. The TX will be propagated and watched as with a normal spend.
This resolves some complicated state management issues in some kinds of client (like on Android). It's also just generally a part of the work to divorce the notion of settling a channel from closing underlying protocol connections.
