Skip to content

JoinMarket NG backend for regtest environment#1166

Draft
m0wer wants to merge 2 commits intov2from
v2-jm-ng
Draft

JoinMarket NG backend for regtest environment#1166
m0wer wants to merge 2 commits intov2from
v2-jm-ng

Conversation

@m0wer
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@m0wer m0wer commented Mar 18, 2026

Most functionality working!

TODO:

  • sweep (tumbler)
  • UTXO labels (cj-out displaying as deposit)

@m0wer m0wer self-assigned this Mar 18, 2026
@theborakompanioni
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@m0wer Would it be possible to keep the joinmarket-clientserver as well and add jm-ng as an additional instance?

@m0wer
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

m0wer commented Mar 19, 2026

@m0wer Would it be possible to keep the joinmarket-clientserver as well and add jm-ng as an additional instance?

Sure! That's actually what we have in the compatibility tests in the jm-ng repo (a mix of reference and ng makers and takers).

What would be your preferred setup? Leave the current 3 jm-ref instances and add a jm-ng one? What about the directory server? Anything else?

@theborakompanioni
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

theborakompanioni commented Mar 20, 2026

@m0wer Would it be possible to keep the joinmarket-clientserver as well and add jm-ng as an additional instance?

Sure! That's actually what we have in the compatibility tests in the jm-ng repo (a mix of reference and ng makers and takers).

What would be your preferred setup? Leave the current 3 jm-ref instances and add a jm-ng one? What about the directory server? Anything else?

Yeah, maybe just leave the three joinmarket-clientserver instances as is and just add two jm-ng ones. Ideally devs can change the primary backend via env vars and running npm run dev and npm run jm-ng:dev (or similar).
Regarding the directory server: Would also be nice to switch between them via env vars, but if that adds too much complexity, I am fine with running both or replacing it completely (I suppose the old setup works with your new directory server nicely..). What do you think? Any other recommendations?

@theborakompanioni theborakompanioni added v2 Related to the redesigned v2 release devtools Improvements in tooling labels Mar 29, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

devtools Improvements in tooling v2 Related to the redesigned v2 release

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants