Implement NULLDUMMY softfork (BIP147) #8636

pull jl2012 wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from jl2012:nulldummy changing 3 files +150 −0

jl2012 commented at 11:45 AM on August 31, 2016: contributor

Alternative to #8533

This will enforce SCRIPT_VERIFY_NULLDUMMY on all segwit and non-segwit transactions when segwit is activated with BIP9.

As we may need more time to implement LOW_S softfork in a better way (see #8533 (comment)), the alternative plan is to implement only NULLDUMMY softfork in 0.13.1 and leave LOW_S as a policy at this moment.
Implement NULLDUMMY softfork 482f852da6
fanquake added the label Consensus on Aug 31, 2016
jl2012 commented at 1:47 AM on September 2, 2016: contributor

Need a 0.13.1 tag
fanquake added this to the milestone 0.13.1 on Sep 2, 2016
petertodd commented at 5:46 AM on September 2, 2016: contributor

Concept ACK
dcousens commented at 11:55 AM on September 2, 2016: contributor

concept ACK
btcdrak commented at 8:40 PM on September 2, 2016: contributor

Concept ACK
btcdrak commented at 12:29 PM on September 4, 2016: contributor

needs backport tag.
fanquake added the label Backport on Sep 4, 2016
fanquake added the label Needs backport on Sep 4, 2016
fanquake removed the label Backport on Sep 4, 2016
jl2012 renamed this:
~~Implement NULLDUMMY softfork~~
Implement NULLDUMMY softfork (BIP147)
on Sep 4, 2016
jl2012 commented at 12:43 PM on September 4, 2016: contributor

This is an implementation of BIP147, which could be found at https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/36496946860d71d4460437572e6c4c780b125cad/bip-0147.mediawiki

I propose that reviewers should explicitly acknowledge that this pull request is a correct implementation of a specified version of BIP147. So they should review the relevant codes, for example, in interpreter.cpp.

This is needed because in #8533 we just focused on the PR, but not the consensus codes being activated. NULLDUMMY should be reasonably simple for everything to do more careful review.

For example, a reviewer may use: utACK 482f852, ACK BIP147 3649694
sipa commented at 12:21 PM on September 6, 2016: member

utACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/36496946860d71d4460437572e6c4c780b125cad/bip-0147.mediawiki utACK 482f852
NicolasDorier commented at 4:01 AM on September 7, 2016: contributor

utACK 482f852da65457eb2fbea6b259e7568133fb81c4
btcdrak commented at 10:29 AM on September 9, 2016: contributor

utACK 482f852

This has been active on testnet3 for a few weeks already. Already tACK from previous PR #8533 (comment)
jameshilliard commented at 12:26 PM on September 12, 2016: contributor

utACK 482f852da65457eb2fbea6b259e7568133fb81c4
rubensayshi commented at 7:56 AM on September 13, 2016: contributor

utACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/482f852da65457eb2fbea6b259e7568133fb81c4
btcdrak approved
afk11 approved
afk11 commented at 4:00 PM on September 17, 2016: contributor

Code review ACK 482f852 ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/36496946860d71d4460437572e6c4c780b125cad/bip-0147.mediawiki
instagibbs commented at 2:13 PM on September 19, 2016: member

code review/utACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8636/commits/482f852da65457eb2fbea6b259e7568133fb81c4
laanwj commented at 8:57 AM on September 22, 2016: member

utACK 482f852
laanwj merged this on Sep 22, 2016
laanwj closed this on Sep 22, 2016
laanwj referenced this in commit 26b370a937 on Sep 22, 2016
laanwj referenced this in commit 9dfa0c8d90 on Sep 26, 2016
laanwj commented at 2:57 PM on September 26, 2016: member

This is backported in #8815, removing tag
laanwj removed the label Needs backport on Sep 26, 2016
codablock referenced this in commit 075b4d320c on Jan 30, 2018
andvgal referenced this in commit 00d22dbaf9 on Jan 6, 2019
CryptoCentric referenced this in commit 2e66eac389 on Feb 28, 2019
CryptoCentric referenced this in commit 53df88f702 on Mar 2, 2019
MarcoFalke locked this on Sep 8, 2021