Hi Bitcoin Developers,

Note: This email is inspired from 
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-March/018538.html 
written by Chris Belcher

Lets compare all covenant proposals:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YL5ttNb6-SHS6-C8-1tHwao1_19zNQ-31YWPAHDZgfo/edit#gid=0

Why general and recursive covenants are controversial:

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-February/019976.html

Why I prefer CTV over APO?

- LN symmetry can be achieved with CSFS later if there is really a demand apart 
from twitter
- CTV improves LN
- CTV does not change how sighash works still we get covenants
- Less bytes
- More tooling
- Not recursive
- Not limited to taproot
- Other differences

MASF or speedy trial allows miners to coordinate and signal "readiness". This 
is misunderstood by lot of users as miners can always refuse to follow new 
consensus rules even after signaling or economics nodes can reject blocks with 
new consensus rules later.

Instead of doing this we could do a UASF in which things are clear that 
economic nodes enforce consensus rules and miners or majority of miners at this 
point wont go against bitcoin communities including nodes with some economic 
activity.

If there is a positive feedback, we could work on building UASF client for 
activation and bitcoin core can follow.

/dev/fd0

floppy disk guy
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

Reply via email to