Re: [bitcoindev] CTV + CSFS: a letter

["James O'Beirne" <james.obeirne@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1433 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 9:51 AM Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
wrote:
> That said, I have yet to see a reasoned explanation of why we should
prefer CTV over TXHASH.

From the author of TXHASH himself on Delving Bitcoin
(
https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/ctv-csfs-can-we-reach-consensus-on-a-first-step-towards-covenants/1509/15
):

> Having implemented TXHASH, I would definitely not say that
> it “simplifies the change”. The difference in both technical debt and
> potential for bugs is an order of magnitude bigger for TXHASH than for
> CTV. (Not to say that I don’t think TXHASH would be worthwhile, but I
> will definitely say that it has not received the attention I had
expected,
> so I would definitely not want to put it on the table anytime soon.)

The use-cases that might merit such a jump up in complexity over CTV
have not been enumerated to my knowledge. CTV also includes
upgrade hooks to incorporate modifications should these additional
uses be more fully understood.

Best,
James

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAPfvXf%2Bt33u1ghz39cqYn4k5ErmxTkUv0njF9Zwbz_2UkdTjAg%40mail.gmail.com.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2571 bytes --]