Skip to content
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

News: add #45 (2019-05-07) #139

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 7, 2019
Merged

Conversation

@harding
Copy link
Contributor

@harding harding commented May 6, 2019

No description provided.

@harding harding force-pushed the 2019-05-07-newsletter branch from 00acd55 to e86dda0 May 6, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@jnewbery jnewbery left a comment

Looks great. ACK e86dda0

I've left a couple of nitty comments, but they're really a matter of personal taste, so feel free to ignore!

PSBTs; `analyzepsbt` to tell the user what they next need to do
with the PSBT; and `utxoupdatepsbt` to add necessary information
to a PSBT from a node's UTXO set. Additionally, new [PSBT
documentation][] is provided---it's based on the PSBT section from
Copy link
Contributor

@jnewbery jnewbery May 7, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: 'provided---it's based on...' seems a bit disjointed. How about "provided, which is based on ..."?


- *Initial RPC support for output script descriptors:* Bitcoin
wallets need a way to find all the transactions on the block chain
that pay their keys. This is easy if the wallet only supports one
Copy link
Contributor

@jnewbery jnewbery May 7, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: how about 'pay to addresses controlled by their keys' or 'pay to outputs controlled by their keys' rather than 'pay their keys'?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@harding harding May 7, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I changed s/their keys/the user/ because I don't think this needs to be too specific given that the next sentence gets into details about scriptPubKey. However, any of these versions is fine by me if you want to change it. (I slightly prefer "outputs controlled by their keys" since we later talk about P2PK, which isn't strictly an address.)

Copy link
Contributor Author

@harding harding May 7, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Eh, on doing a final proofread, I changed this even more. In any case, please feel free to edit as you see fit at merge time.

newsletter---tests are rarely news unless something goes
wrong---so we wanted to take this opportunity to remind readers
that testing remains an active and important part of Bitcoin Core
development.
Copy link
Contributor

@jnewbery jnewbery May 7, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

😍

only creates a clearer division between layers in the system's code
but it also prepares for future improvements in the peer-handling code
that will allow it to be smarter about banning peers based on multiple
criteria.
Copy link
Contributor

@jnewbery jnewbery May 7, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great summary!

mentioned in the *news* section of [Newsletter #40][], the release
notes announce the project's intention to switch to bech32 sending
addresses by default in either the next major version (0.19,
[expected around January 2020][0.19 release schedule]) or the
Copy link
Contributor

@moneyball moneyball May 7, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has been updated to November 2019. bitcoin/bitcoin#15940 (comment)

@harding harding force-pushed the 2019-05-07-newsletter branch from e86dda0 to 6d01142 May 7, 2019
@harding
Copy link
Contributor Author

@harding harding commented May 7, 2019

Force pushed an edit that hopefully addresses all feedback and which also makes a few minor edits based on my final proofread. Thanks @jnewbery and @moneyball!

@practicalswift
Copy link

@practicalswift practicalswift commented May 7, 2019

Yet another excellent newsletter! Thanks!

ACK 6d01142

@jnewbery
Copy link
Contributor

@jnewbery jnewbery commented May 7, 2019

utACK 6d01142

Thanks Dave!

@jnewbery jnewbery merged commit a717695 into bitcoinops:master May 7, 2019
2 checks passed
@bitcoinops bitcoinops deleted a comment Aug 18, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants