Rename OP_NOP3 to OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY #7540

1. 
   btcdrak commented at 6:52 PM on February 16, 2016: contributor

   No description provided.

2. 
   dcousens commented at 10:24 PM on February 16, 2016: contributor

   utACK 0cbfd0b

3. 
   luke-jr commented at 12:38 AM on February 17, 2016: member

   Premature until the softfork is accepted, no?

4. 
   luke-jr commented at 12:39 AM on February 17, 2016: member

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

5. 
   laanwj commented at 9:06 AM on February 17, 2016: member

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

6. laanwj added the label Docs and Output on Feb 17, 2016
7. 
   laanwj commented at 12:11 PM on June 8, 2016: member

   Needs rebase.

8. 
   jl2012 commented at 10:23 AM on June 27, 2016: contributor

   are we going to do this in 0.13.0?

9. 
   laanwj commented at 10:26 AM on June 27, 2016: member

   I think we should

10. laanwj added this to the milestone 0.13.0 on Jun 27, 2016
11. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 10:51 AM on June 27, 2016: member

    @btcdrak Needs rebase

12. MarcoFalke added the label Needs backport on Jun 27, 2016
13. Rename OP_NOP3 to OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY 14d01309be
14. btcdrak force-pushed on Jun 28, 2016
15. Rename NOP3 to CHECSEQUENCEVERIFY in rpc tests 18c975c831
16. 
    btcdrak commented at 4:24 PM on June 28, 2016: contributor

    @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?

17. 
    petertodd commented at 6:10 PM on July 5, 2016: contributor

    utACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7540/commits/18c975c831a3a71b26df43a2617a06840f3aa377

18. 
    paveljanik commented at 8:07 AM on July 6, 2016: contributor

    ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7540/commits/18c975c831a3a71b26df43a2617a06840f3aa377

19. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 7:20 PM on July 6, 2016: member

    utACK 18c975c

20. 
    laanwj commented at 9:28 AM on July 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.

21. laanwj merged this on Jul 8, 2016
22. laanwj closed this on Jul 8, 2016

    ---

23. laanwj referenced this in commit ff46dd4a34 on Jul 8, 2016
24. btcdrak deleted the branch on Jul 8, 2016
25. laanwj referenced this in commit 5c84382076 on Jul 11, 2016
26. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 11:22 AM on July 11, 2016: member

    Backported via 5c84382. Removing label.

27. MarcoFalke removed the label Needs backport on Jul 11, 2016
28. DrahtBot locked this on Sep 8, 2021

Milestone
0.13.0