Feature request: Multiple API keys

[agis]

It would be nice to be able to use multiple keys per exchange, as in the example below, in order to avoid running multiple instances of GUNBOT.
This way we can have all the coins in one configuration, use one account for de-bagging, another for high volume coins, a third one for low volume ones, etc., manage all of them in one configuration, and move them around as needed, but still keep separate profiles/accounts with different targets and trade scenarios.

 "poloniex-bags": {
                        "exchange": "poloniex",
                        "key": "KEY 1",
                        "secret": ""
                },
 "poloniex-high-vol": {
                        "exchange": "poloniex",
                        "key": "KEY 2",
                        "secret": ""
                },
 "poloniex-low-vol": {
                        "exchange": "poloniex",
                        "key": "KEY 3",
                        "secret": ""
                },

[GuyTheGuy]

Not exactly sure the benefit? It would be doing the same thing, just a different address. Seems like you have an idea just havent been able to articulate?

[agis]

Sorry for the delay in replying; I was on vacation 

I like to group the coins I'm trading. Let's say the groups are
1. High volume coins
2. Low volume coins
3. Newly introduced coins

To trade them, I use 3 different accounts, and each group/account has a different strategy, so I can easily change the strategy of a group, or move coins in/out of a group.

The benefit is just ease of use, and not having to run 3 instances of GUNBOT

[Leetmor1]

Why? this is soooo pointless, you can already do this yourself

"Implemented command line option to load config.js from external url: add param --Example: ./gunthy-linx64 --config=https://gunthy.org/config.js"


So all you do is have a server where you edit your config as a master / slave kind of thing. Sure you might miss out on the live editiing, but if you want to split things up like you talk about then its already possible.

[agis]

1. This is not a must have feature. It can very well go to the very bottom of the features-to-be-implemented list, and be forgotten there

2.

Why? this is soooo pointless, you can already do this yourself

The command line argument is sooooo irrelevant... Think about it: Running 1 instance, instead of running 3 instances... what is better?

[Leetmor1]

1. This is not a must have feature. It can very well go to the very bottom of the features-to-be-implemented list, and be forgotten there

2.

Why? this is soooo pointless, you can already do this yourself

The command line argument is sooooo irrelevant... Think about it: Running 1 instance, instead of running 3 instances... what is better?

Why would only running 1 instance be superior? If you run 3, you're more redundant. If you run them on separate ips you can trade faster.

You cited ease of use having it all in one place, and the remote config solves that issue. So seems quite relevant indeed

[mbdash]

+1 on the feature request
since it would also mean implementing the Polo proxy patch within the bot avoiding the polo 422 errors