Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Cory Fields
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Cory Fields wrote: >> >> That's exactly what happened during the modularization process, with >> the exception that the code movement and refactors happened in >> parallel

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Cory Fields
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Peter Todd wrote: > BtcDrak was working on rebasing my CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY¹ patch to master a few > days ago and found a fairly large design change that makes merging it > currently > impossible. Pull-req #4890², specifically commit c7829ea7, changed the > EvalScr

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Cory Fields
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Btc Drak wrote: >> >> We all want to see more modular code, but the first steps should just be >> to relocate blocks of code so everything is more logically organised in >> smaller files (especially for consen

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Cory Fields
Sounds like this is what you're after, it's a fairly new feature: https://github.com/blog/1375%0A-task-lists-in-gfm-issues-pulls-comments I've been meaning to use it in a PR to try it out. Cory On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Wladimir wrote: >> This all makes a lot of sense to me, and would he