dexX7 comments

Results 9 comments of


                                            dexX7

Use annotations to mark test Specs and/or features as @RegTest or not.

This is very nice! Potentially, this could also be used to get rid of the `setupSpec -> !commandExists -> throw AssumptionViolatedException` workarounds?

Use annotations to mark test Specs and/or features as @RegTest or not.

At least out of the box it's not as simple as adding: ``` groovy @Requires({ commandExists('abc') }) ``` While it works with simple expressions such as `{ true }`, I...

Will there be signed SHA256 for binary releases?

From the other thread: > @jjasonbcox: we'll need to rely on devs publishing their signatures themselves (which is far from ideal). Even without a place for Gitian signatures, each commit...

Make provably unsignable standard P2PK and P2MS outpoints unspendable.

Concept ACK. Note, however, that pubkeys can be modified to be valid and still be used to store data, for example by using a byte that is shuffled until the...

Who is the owner of these two addresses?

Sorry, maybe I miss the obvious here: why does it matter?

Who is the owner of these two addresses?

@GandalfBitcoin: no, this is not what I meant. At first it wasn't clear to me what this is actually about, primarily, because you provided almost no context. I have a...

A flaw in creating commitment transaction if without Sendmany

Hello @neocarmack, we want to add sendmany for quite a while, but we've never pinned down the specifics. We have limited payload space and there are multiple ways to approach...

A flaw in creating commitment transaction if without Sendmany

Awesome, thanks for the fast feedback! Do you need explicit BTC outputs for each receiver?

A flaw in creating commitment transaction if without Sendmany

Thanks for the reference @neocarmack. We're pretty close with releasing it, but ironing out the last details. Please feel free to hop into the comment section in the gist.