-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 +1 I was actually waiting for this. It makes 'smart contracts' simpler and better from many points of view.
Pete I don't see anything about RCLTV in BIP65, was that a separate BIP? Which one is it and are we also deploying it via IsSuperMajority()? RCLTV in addition to CLTV would be trivial so maybe we can take the pain just once? On 9/27/2015 9:50 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Summary ------- > > It's time to deploy BIP65 CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY. > > I've backported the CLTV op-code and a IsSuperMajority() soft-fork > to the v0.10 and v0.11 branches, pull-reqs #6706 and #6707 > respectively. A pull-req for git HEAD for the soft-fork deployment > has been open since June 28th, #6351 - the opcode implementation > itself was merged two months ago. > > We should release a v0.10.3 and v0.11.1 with CLTV and get the ball > rolling on miner adoption. We have consensus that we need CLTV, we > have a well tested implementation, and we have a well-tested > deployment mechanism. We also don't need to wait for other > soft-fork proposals to catch up - starting the CLTV deployment > process isn't going to delay future soft-forks, or for that matter, > hard-forks. > > I think it's possible to safely get CLTV live on mainnet before the > end of the year. It's time we get this over with and done. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWCRIeAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRlqgH/iir3Ao99WMNV0xC5RL+fv/Q J1az1dXif9w9sTaCZMkENyIH9B2kwmOcPX/pU+p75qNvhQi9OrNMNRE8Wlwa+tcL DD9DbyiQvxKdXjCnZqUyyIgBjuFbiF5VNQ67B1faEnzvmX81PoDjd2FPC51WChjZ j7xPcJ73d23OPXpsKtyaUwn1QbGwprhFCEkcqjC50gw/IQkMJiqZ6pMepDVSyGKl RpOsWCyCVoTJtM5NFk7wXg5LBFA7rXXQL56M00YJKLJAx/ooGb2T4ZRX0GeEWX8/ wquNA9Bj7picIr20sPohGE0cr2QiD3gmL9qLT2ZDlrFFDk8thL8afOx00Z6ih3I= =dPXd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
