Covenants support: Difference between revisions

From Bitcoin Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Merge edit by Kaloudis
Tag: merged edit of another user
Merge edit by ReardenCode
Tag: merged edit of another user
Line 53: Line 53:
| matthewjablack || Atomic Finance || {{Prefer}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Weak}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Evaluating}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Weak}}
| matthewjablack || Atomic Finance || {{Prefer}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Weak}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Evaluating}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Weak}}
|-
|-
| reardencode || LNHANCE || {{Prefer}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Deficient}} || {{No}}
| reardencode || LNHANCE || {{Prefer}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Wanting}}<ref name="reardenvault">Only one of CCV and VAULT should be implemented, as they enable nearly identical constructions</ref> || {{Wanting}}<ref name="reardenvault"/> || {{Deficient}} || {{No}}
|-
|-
| benthecarman || Taproot Wizards || {{Prefer}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Weak}}
| benthecarman || Taproot Wizards || {{Prefer}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Weak}}
Line 71: Line 71:
| Evan Kaloudis || ZEUS || {{Prefer}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Weak}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{No}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Deficient}} || {{Prefer}}
| Evan Kaloudis || ZEUS || {{Prefer}} || {{Wanting}} || {{Weak}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{No}} || {{Acceptable}} || {{Prefer}} || {{Deficient}} || {{Prefer}}
|}
|}
<references/>

Revision as of 11:50, 5 December 2024

This list is incomplete and under construction.

Evaluating Not sure. Still evaluating the idea
No Doesn't support (but might or might not go along with it with sufficient community support)
Deficient Okay with the idea, but considers it to have insufficient community support
Weak Better than nothing at all
Wanting Positively likes the idea, but considers it to have insufficient community support
Acceptable It is a workable solution
Prefer The best option all things considered

Developers

Developer Affiliation LNHANCE OP_CAT OP_CCV OP_VAULT OP_TXHASH SIGHASH_APO
OP_CTV OP_CSFS OP_PAIRCOMMIT OP_INTERNALKEY
1440000bytes joinstr Prefer Acceptable No Acceptable Deficient Evaluating Acceptable No No
Jon Atack Bitcoin Core Acceptable Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating
Luke Dashjr Bitcoin Knots Acceptable Wanting Evaluating No Deficient Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Acceptable
moonsettler LNhance Prefer Prefer Prefer Prefer Wanting Wanting Wanting Wanting Weak
matthewjablack Atomic Finance Prefer Acceptable Weak Acceptable Wanting Evaluating Acceptable Wanting Weak
reardencode LNHANCE Prefer Prefer Acceptable Prefer Wanting Wanting[1] Wanting[1] Deficient No
benthecarman Taproot Wizards Prefer Prefer Acceptable Prefer Prefer Wanting Wanting Wanting Weak
instagibbs Spiral Weak Wanting No Wanting Wanting Evaluating Wanting Wanting Weak
anon nonane dev Bitcoin/LN No Evaluating Evaluating No No Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating
jaybny Sidepit Prefer Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Weak Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating Acceptable
cryptoquick Surmount Systems Acceptable Prefer Evaluating Prefer Acceptable Evaluating Acceptable Prefer No
RobinLinus BitVM No Acceptable Evaluating No Deficient Evaluating Evaluating Prefer Weak
jamesob ??? Prefer Prefer Weak Prefer Acceptable Wanting Acceptable Deficient Weak
Evan Kaloudis ZEUS Prefer Wanting Weak Acceptable No Acceptable Prefer Deficient Prefer
  1. 1.0 1.1 Only one of CCV and VAULT should be implemented, as they enable nearly identical constructions