On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandre...@gmail.com> wrote: > If the remote party is one of the parties involved in a multisig, and speaks > the "Lets set up a multisig wallet together / Lets spend from a multisig" > protocols, then it should be perfectly reasonable to assume that they're > HD-capable.
Disagree. It is an unnecessary restriction. People are already writing and starting to deploy multisig wallets in the field, that do not match this assumption. In general, HD is really cool, but even the barest amount of infrastructure is lacking. Popular libraries and the reference client all lack support. Building a protocol that assumes HD is optimistic at this stage. -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
