From: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Joseph Poon <joseph@lightning.network>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 23:32:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABm2gDrz7CYbKjd=4Fe+g06GdumOUh=HDN75YUmo6ixRnH+GcQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150819212710.GA17777@lightning.network>
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Joseph Poon <joseph@lightning.network> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 09:21:36AM -0700, Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> If anyone feels strongly about this, please speak up.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:37 AM, Jorge Tim??n <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> > I repeated my nit on https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/179
>
> I am also indifferent, but also dislike technical debt.
>
> It should maybe be noted for those who wish to do/write-code-for mempool
> transaction selection (irrespective of one's opinion on it) that lower
> is better, since transactions with shorter relative locks are
> transactions with "higher priority".
That policy code should be simple to change, but thank you for pointing it out.
Also thank you for declaring your position (indifference) on the subject.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-19 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-13 11:06 [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime Btc Drak
2015-08-13 18:12 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-13 19:20 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-08-13 23:42 ` Joseph Poon
2015-08-14 0:47 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-14 18:53 ` Matt Corallo
2015-08-14 21:29 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-14 22:24 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-17 19:58 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-19 10:37 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-19 16:21 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-19 21:27 ` Joseph Poon
2015-08-19 21:32 ` Jorge Timón [this message]
2015-08-20 21:23 ` Peter Todd
2015-08-24 0:25 ` Tom Harding
2015-08-24 1:01 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-08-24 2:23 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-24 2:37 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-25 22:08 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-25 22:36 ` Tier Nolan
2015-08-27 23:32 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-09-16 22:40 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-16 23:23 ` Eric Lombrozo
2015-09-17 4:23 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-09-18 1:21 ` Rusty Russell
2015-09-17 7:43 ` jl2012
2015-08-24 2:40 ` jl2012
2015-08-24 2:54 ` Mark Friedenbach
2015-08-24 7:00 ` jl2012
2015-08-25 10:15 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-27 3:08 ` Rusty Russell
2015-08-27 11:03 ` David A. Harding
2015-08-27 12:29 ` jl2012
2015-08-30 21:33 ` Rusty Russell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CABm2gDrz7CYbKjd=4Fe+g06GdumOUh=HDN75YUmo6ixRnH+GcQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jtimon@jtimon.cc \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=joseph@lightning.network \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox