> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/ is a good reference if you're
> interested in seeing how PEPs work in action. I would be more than
> willing to maintain a similar index if that's what people want.
Would the multi-signature proposal be a good test case for BEP-0002?
https://gist.github.com/dba89
"Gavin Andresen" wrote:
> I wanted to talk about it now so there is rough consensus on what to
> put on the road map, and to get as many smart brains looking at the
> proposal and making it as good as possible. Current proposal is at:
> https://gist.github.com/39158239e36f6af69d6f
>
> I have t
>> Whitelisting the basic CHECKMULTISIG form (assuming it can be made to
>> work) seems uncontroversial, why not do it today?
>
> That seems like the right way forward.
>
> I just wrote a unit test and stepped through the CHECKMULTISIG code to
> see exactly what the bug is, and the offending line i
"Gavin Andresen" wrote:
> It seems to me the fastest path to very secure, very-hard-to-lose
> bitcoin wallets is multi-signature transactions.
>
> To organize this discussion: first, does everybody agree?
I agree. For example, a corporate wallet can require threshold signatures
to disburse. Or
4 matches
Mail list logo
