New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rename OP_NOP3 to OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY #7540

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jul 8, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
8 participants
@btcdrak
Member

btcdrak commented Feb 16, 2016

No description provided.

@dcousens

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dcousens

dcousens Feb 16, 2016

Contributor

utACK 0cbfd0b

Contributor

dcousens commented Feb 16, 2016

utACK 0cbfd0b

@luke-jr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@luke-jr

luke-jr Feb 17, 2016

Member

Premature until the softfork is accepted, no?

Member

luke-jr commented Feb 17, 2016

Premature until the softfork is accepted, no?

@luke-jr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@luke-jr

luke-jr Feb 17, 2016

Member

(Also, much prefer CHECKMATURITYVERIFY for a name...)

Member

luke-jr commented Feb 17, 2016

(Also, much prefer CHECKMATURITYVERIFY for a name...)

@laanwj

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@laanwj

laanwj Feb 17, 2016

Member

I also think this is too early. Until the softfork goes through this is still effectively a NOP.

Member

laanwj commented Feb 17, 2016

I also think this is too early. Until the softfork goes through this is still effectively a NOP.

@laanwj laanwj added the Docs label Feb 17, 2016

@laanwj laanwj referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2016

Closed

Post CSV softfork trigger TODOs #8131

2 of 2 tasks complete
@laanwj

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@laanwj

laanwj Jun 8, 2016

Member

Needs rebase.

Member

laanwj commented Jun 8, 2016

Needs rebase.

@jl2012

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jl2012

jl2012 Jun 27, 2016

Member

are we going to do this in 0.13.0?

Member

jl2012 commented Jun 27, 2016

are we going to do this in 0.13.0?

@laanwj

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@laanwj

laanwj Jun 27, 2016

Member

I think we should

Member

laanwj commented Jun 27, 2016

I think we should

@laanwj laanwj added this to the 0.13.0 milestone Jun 27, 2016

@MarcoFalke

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@MarcoFalke

MarcoFalke Jun 27, 2016

Member

@btcdrak Needs rebase

Member

MarcoFalke commented Jun 27, 2016

@btcdrak Needs rebase

@btcdrak

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@btcdrak

btcdrak Jun 28, 2016

Member

@laanwj This will not cleanly cherry-pick to 0.12, would you like be to create the backport for 0.12 as a separate PR?

Member

btcdrak commented Jun 28, 2016

@laanwj This will not cleanly cherry-pick to 0.12, would you like be to create the backport for 0.12 as a separate PR?

@petertodd

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@petertodd

petertodd Jul 5, 2016

Contributor

utACK 18c975c

Contributor

petertodd commented Jul 5, 2016

utACK 18c975c

@paveljanik

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@paveljanik

paveljanik Jul 6, 2016

Contributor

ACK 18c975c

Contributor

paveljanik commented Jul 6, 2016

ACK 18c975c

@MarcoFalke

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@MarcoFalke
Member

MarcoFalke commented Jul 6, 2016

utACK 18c975c

@laanwj

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@laanwj

laanwj Jul 8, 2016

Member

@btcdrak Yes, I think a separate backport PR would make sense in this case, as it's probably easier to do the replacement another time than try to coax git into cherry-picking this.

Member

laanwj commented Jul 8, 2016

@btcdrak Yes, I think a separate backport PR would make sense in this case, as it's probably easier to do the replacement another time than try to coax git into cherry-picking this.

@laanwj laanwj merged commit 18c975c into bitcoin:master Jul 8, 2016

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

laanwj added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2016

Merge #7540: Rename OP_NOP3 to OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY
18c975c Rename NOP3 to CHECSEQUENCEVERIFY in rpc tests (BtcDrak)
14d0130 Rename OP_NOP3 to OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY (BtcDrak)

@btcdrak btcdrak deleted the btcdrak:rename_nop3 branch Jul 8, 2016

laanwj added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2016

Merge #8318: [0.12] Backport "Rename OP_NOP3 to OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY
…#7540"

c4e5688 Rename NOP3 to CHECSEQUENCEVERIFY in rpc tests (BtcDrak)
ac5577b Rename OP_NOP3 to OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY (BtcDrak)
@MarcoFalke

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@MarcoFalke

MarcoFalke Jul 11, 2016

Member

Backported via 5c84382. Removing label.

Member

MarcoFalke commented Jul 11, 2016

Backported via 5c84382. Removing label.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment