Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change the default ring size in the cli commands to be the same as in Particl Desktop #78

Open
bacoinin opened this issue Sep 1, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@bacoinin
Copy link

bacoinin commented Sep 1, 2020

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The default ring size in the cli commands is set to 5 while the in the Particl Desktop is set to 8. This makes anon txs generated by the cli commands with default options distinguishable from the ones coming from the Particl Desktop wallet.

Describe the solution you'd like
Please set the default option to the same value as in the Particl Desktop wallet.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Not many alternatives as people often dont bother changing the default options.

Additional context
Arnold (zaSmilingIdiot) promised to run some tests and examine the possibility of increasing the default ring size value in the Particl Desktop 3.0. Could you guys (Kewde, Tecnovert) please coordinate with him to set the default values in the corresponding cli commands to the same as values as in PD wallet.

Thank you in advance :)

@bacoinin
Copy link
Author

Bumping this issue.

If possible could you also please change the default ring size in the QT GUI too. Currently its set to 5.

tecnovert added a commit to tecnovert/particl-core that referenced this issue Feb 16, 2022
@tecnovert
Copy link

The setting for ringsize in qt is stored as nRingSize in ~/.config/Particl/Particl-Qt.conf.
For new installs qt will default to 12, existing installs will still use the last used ringsize.

tecnovert added a commit to tecnovert/particl-core that referenced this issue Feb 19, 2022
tecnovert added a commit to tecnovert/particl-core that referenced this issue Feb 24, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants