Add uncontroversial RBF base features #7824

pull jonasschnelli wants to merge 4 commits into bitcoin:master from jonasschnelli:2016/04/rbf_uncontroversial changing 5 files +37 −14

jonasschnelli commented at 11:51 AM on April 6, 2016: contributor
- add option to set nSequence in createrawtransaction
- add nSequence option to bitcoin-tx
- Refactor CreateTransaction (remove sign-bool and make use of bit flags)

[Refactor] CreateTransaction(): use bit flags

This will allow to add flags for RBF and other features

2eaab4e810

Allow to opt-into RBF when creating a transaction ffb6938dfa
[bitcoin-tx] allow to set nSequence number over the in= command d4b6eedac3
[RPC] createrawtransaction: add option to set the sequence number per input 339ae24f89
jonasschnelli added the label Wallet on Apr 6, 2016
jonasschnelli commented at 11:53 AM on April 6, 2016: contributor

The uncontroversial commits of #7159. Is unclear how we allow opt-in-RBF over RPC and in the GUI. One proposal would be to add a command alterrawtransaction (that could support setting the opt-in nSequence for all inputs of the provided rawtx. The command could also take care of increasing the fees).
dcousens commented at 1:12 AM on April 7, 2016: contributor

Was #7159 controversial? I don't even see a NACK?
jonasschnelli commented at 6:57 AM on April 7, 2016: contributor

@dcousens Yes. #7159 contains booleans for createrawtransaction and fundrawtransaction to opt-int-RBF. Not sure if we want this or if we should go with a new call (something like alterrawtransaction). Also the process/workflow how to change the fee of a opt-in-RBF transaction is unclear (could also go over alterrawtransaction). And then, there is also the point where we once said we should move the utility-only functions to bitcoin-tx, etc.

This PR does only add a feature to set the nSequence number per input for createrawtransaction and bitcoin-tx. This is not directly related to RBF.

At least with this PR someone can create a RBF tx without fiddling with the hex-string (good for testing future changes as well).
jonasschnelli commented at 11:46 AM on April 12, 2016: contributor

Closing in favor of #7865.
jonasschnelli closed this on Apr 12, 2016

in src/rpc/rawtransaction.cpp:None in 339ae24f89

 333 | @@ -334,6 +334,7 @@ UniValue createrawtransaction(const UniValue& params, bool fHelp)
 334 |              "       {\n"
 335 |              "         \"txid\":\"id\",    (string, required) The transaction id\n"
 336 |              "         \"vout\":n        (numeric, required) The output number\n"
 337 | +            "         \"sequence\":n    (numeric, optional) The sequence number (will overwrite RBF opt-in)\n"

gmaxwell commented at 10:04 AM on June 15, 2016:

Perhaps the will override comment is a bit confusing with the functionality missing? maybe add a "in future"?

DrahtBot locked this on Sep 8, 2021

Contributors

Labels