There's also now a faucet: https://faucet.ctvsignet.com
thanks 0x0ff! -- @JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 3:13 AM 0x0ff <0x...@onsats.org> wrote: > Good day, > > I've setup the explorer for CTV Signet which is now up and running at > https://explorer.ctvsignet.com > > Best, > @0x0ff <https://twitter.com/0x0ff_> > > ------- Original Message ------- > On Thursday, February 17th, 2022 at 9:58 PM, Jeremy Rubin via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Hi devs, > > I have been running a CTV signet for around a year and it's seen little > use. Early on I had some issues syncing new nodes, but I have verified > syncability to this signet using > https://github.com/JeremyRubin/bitcoin/tree/checktemplateverify-signet-23.0-alpha. > Please use this signet! > > ``` > [signet] > > signetchallenge=512102946e8ba8eca597194e7ed90377d9bbebc5d17a9609ab3e35e706612ee882759351ae > addnode=50.18.75.225 > ``` > > This should be operational. Let me know if there are any issues you > experience (likely with signet itself, but CTV too). > > Feel free to also email me an address and I can send you some signet coins > -- if anyone is interested in running an automatic faucet I would love help > with that and will send you a lot of coins. > > AJ Wrote (in another thread): > > > I'd much rather see some real > > third-party experimentation *somewhere* public first, and Jeremy's CTV > > signet being completely empty seems like a bad sign to me. Maybe that > > means we should tentatively merge the feature and deploy it on the > > default global signet though? Not really sure how best to get more > > real world testing; but "deploy first, test later" doesn't sit right. > > I agree that real experimentation would be great, and think that merging > the code (w/o activation) for signet would likely help users v.s. custom > builds/parameters. > > I am unsure that "learning in public" is required -- personally I do > experiments on regtest regularly and on mainnet (using emulators) more > occasionally. I think some of the difficulty is that for setting up signet > stuff you need to wait e.g. 10 minutes for blocks and stuff, source faucet > coins, etc. V.s. regtest you can make tests that run automatically. Maybe > seeing more regtest RPC test samples for regtests would be a sufficient > in-between? > > > Best, > > Jeremy > > -- > @JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin> > > >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
