Newsletters: add 165 (2021-09-08) #639
Conversation
glozow
force-pushed
the
2021-09-09-newsletter
branch
from
119ad6a to
75c016a
Compare
|
@glozow pushed a few small suggested edits to your section; please feel to revert anything you don't like. Previewed the content and it LGTM, thanks! |
jnewbery
left a comment
jnewbery
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've left a few review comments, and also pushed some minor edits to the vaults feature.
| This is about 76.5 vbytes for the cheapest (happy) spending path and about 176.0 vbytes for the costliest (dispute) one. | ||
| Compared to the roughly 134.75 vbytes (happy) and 189.5 vbytes (dispute) by using the following P2WSH: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you share the calculations for this (perhaps as an html comment)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've replaced this sentence with the vaguer "In taproot, only the leaf being used to spend the output needs to be revealed, so the transaction weight is considerably smaller than for the equivalent P2WSH script:"
Perhaps we can update this with the actual transaction weights later?
adamjonas
force-pushed
the
2021-09-09-newsletter
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ae8299d to
42e664a
Compare
|
Reviewed contributed PR descriptions (thanks!), made some small edits for that and for feedback (thanks also), and added topic links. I think there are still a few recommended changes for @glozow if she wants to take them. None seemed critical to me. |
|
Took the suggestions, sorry for the delay! |
|
Pushed some additional changes to the @darosior @glozow and @xekyo sections. Everything else looks good to me. @darosior, could you confirm that you're happy with the new introductory text here: #639 (comment) |
|
ACK for "Bitcoin vaults are a type of contract that require two sequential transactions for a user to spend money from their wallet. Numerous such protocols have been proposed..." that you added. Although it doesn't capture the second transaction is timelocked, i understand my "playing on finality" phrasing was confusing.
Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Le mercredi 8 septembre 2021 à 11:03 AM, John Newbery ***@***.***> a écrit :
… Pushed some additional changes to the ***@***.***(https://github.com/darosior) ***@***.***(https://github.com/glozow) and ***@***.***(https://github.com/Xekyo) sections. Everything else looks good to me.
***@***.***(https://github.com/darosior), could you confirm that you're happy with the new introductory text here: [#639 (comment)](#639 (comment))
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, [view it on GitHub](#639 (comment)), or [unsubscribe](https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFLK3FYVJ7DVWAZRT5OQW6DUA4RFDANCNFSM5DQE526Q).
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for [iOS](https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675) or [Android](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub).
|
|
Good idea on reordering, @jnewbery. Thanks, changes look good to me. |
bitschmidty
force-pushed
the
2021-09-09-newsletter
branch
from
cab22e5 to
965b69d
Compare
8 participants
Bitcoin Core #22009wallet: Decide which coin selection solution to use based on waste metric @xekyoBIPs #1143achow101/descriptors @adamjonasHuge thanks to @darosior for the contributed taproot section this week!