Skip to content

A few multi-hop-locks clarification#18

Merged
jonasnick merged 1 commit intoBlockstreamResearch:masterfrom
t-bast:multi-hop-locks-clarifications
Dec 7, 2019
Merged

A few multi-hop-locks clarification#18
jonasnick merged 1 commit intoBlockstreamResearch:masterfrom
t-bast:multi-hop-locks-clarifications

Conversation

@t-bast
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@t-bast t-bast commented Dec 6, 2019

I dived again into this whole document, and did the following:

  • Fixed a few typos
  • Fixed a small error in the update phase of the flow diagram
  • Harmonized terms payer/payee
  • Added a few clarifications (from the LN's point of view)
  • Some markdown linting

All clarifications are personal: things I thought were a bit clearer with the changes proposed. This is highly subjective, so don't hesitate to tell me if you want me to remove some of those changes.

I'm now familiar enough with the whole construction, so my next PR after this one will add the stuckless/cancellable feature (finally 😃)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@jonasnick jonasnick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! ACK mod nit. In general I prefer sender/receiver vs payer/payee because the latter looks so similar but after this PR changing that would just be copy and paste.

Comment thread md/multi-hop-locks.md Outdated
@t-bast
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

t-bast commented Dec 7, 2019

I prefer sender/receiver vs payer/payee because the latter looks so similar but after this PR changing that would just be copy and paste.

I agree, I chose to stick with payer/payee because it was what was initially there, but I'll change it to sender/recipient now.

* Fixed a few typos
* Fixed a small error in the update phase of the flow diagram
* Harmonized terms payer/payee
* Added a few clarifications (from the LN's point of view)
* Some markdown linting
@t-bast t-bast force-pushed the multi-hop-locks-clarifications branch from 2f2659f to 5c6513d Compare December 7, 2019 11:16
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@jonasnick jonasnick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

excellent, thanks. ACK

@jonasnick jonasnick merged commit 1e083e6 into BlockstreamResearch:master Dec 7, 2019
@t-bast t-bast deleted the multi-hop-locks-clarifications branch December 12, 2019 10:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants