I am requesting a BIP number to be allocated for this simple payjoin proposal.
This proposal is already being implemented by several service and
wallets and incorporate the feedback of the community at
https://github.com/NicolasDorier/bips/pull/3
I opened a pull request at: https://github.com/bitc
Hi everyone,
As some of you know, I am working on a complete open source replacement of
Bitpay for allowing merchant to accept cryptocurrency payments while having
a way to sell automatically.
A crucial, missing part, is fiat conversion. And I figured out a simple
protocol that exchanges (or adap
software
> to talk to a Bitcoin wallet that’s hosted somewhere else for similar
> reasons. Right now the best these plugins can do is hold on to an XPUB, and
> I’ve even seen solutions that just send the customers coins to their own
> backend wallet and then forward it.
>
> Sjors
&
James,
You might be interested by my work which is currently used in production,
without any change to bitcoin core.
I properly explain how to verify the utxoset independently.
https://github.com/btcpayserver/btcpayserver-docker/blob/master/contrib/FastSync/README.md
People are using it, since
Would be wonderful to have this pushed together with CLTV and BIP68.
If BIP68 get pushed in the next fork, this CSV is a no brainer.
Was there a competing RCLTV implementation somewhere that did not depend on
BIP68 for information ? I don't manage to find it.
__
I created a small website which show a chart of your approvals about
various BIPs (which you must fill by yourself with a signed pgp message)
For each BIP, you can fill if you approve or not, and give comments. (HTML
accepted, so you can link stuff you your posts)
It would help the community a lo
get the pools on there
> too.
>
> You're missing Mike Hearn of course.
>
> My key is 0xE5D138F5E73A1AF2
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Nicolas Dorier via bitcoin-dev
> wrote:
> > I created a small website which show a chart of your approvals about
> va
> A visualization I would like to see would include:
> pie graph(s) of what % are voting for (BIP 100, BIP 101, 8MB, BIP sipa
etc) based on what's published in blocks.
If such a vote existed, I would gladly show the pie on BIPxDevs.
However there is no standard way for miners to vote informally B
s to the Bitcoin Core
> project should have a say in this.
>
>
> On Aug 20, 2015, at 8:38 PM, Nicolas Dorier via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks, btcdrak, I just added the column and you in the list. (looks nicer)
>
> What I
edit your position as you progress into your analysis and as
new BIP get redacted.
I'm eager to include the new proposals.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Nicolas Dorier via bitcoin-dev
> wrote:
> > I created
My UX skills are lacking a bit. You can edit all your thoughts about each
BIP, HTML is accepted, so you can link to other posts you made somewhere
else.
When you click on a cell in the grid, it forward you to the page that the
dev edited for this BIP.
This website is not only to say "approve", "di
> 2) In order to prevent significant blowups in the cost to validate
> [...] and transactions are only allowed to contain
> up to 20 non-segwit inputs. [...]
There is two kind of hard fork, the one who breaks things, and the one who
does not.
Restricting the non-segwit inputs would disrupt lots of
Interesting, can you provide some historical context around it so I
understand better ?
Actually I know that your relay's protocol (and about what I see in
abstract) was about optimizing propagation time and not bandwidth.
And I agree that bandwidth is what need to be optimized for nodes.
So far t
Open Asset is a simple and well known colored coin protocol made by Flavien
Charlon, which has been around for more than two years ago.
Open Asset is OP_RETURN to store coin's color. Since then, the only
modification to the protocol has been for allowing OA data to be into any
push into an OP_RETUR
undation.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, July 05, 2016 5:46:36 PM Peter Todd wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 03:53:04AM +, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
>> wrote:
>> > > On Thursday, May 26, 2016 2:50:26 AM Nicolas Dorier via bitcoin-dev
>> wrote:
>&g
I think that regardless of merits protocol or limitations of protocols,
once they become used and stable they merit their place as a BIP.
I'd like to submit OA as is on flavien's repository, and update or reword
things once it is there. (so he can ACK easily and we can keep track of
changes instead
16 matches
Mail list logo
