{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6312","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6312/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6312/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6312/events","html_url":"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6312","id":89695080,"number":6312,"title":"BIP-68: Mempool-only sequence number constraint verification","user":{"login":"maaku","id":69154,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/69154?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku","html_url":"https://github.com/maaku","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/maaku/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/labels/Feature","name":"Feature","color":"7cf575"},{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/labels/Mempool","name":"Mempool","color":"fef2c0"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":165,"created_at":"2015-06-20T00:55:58Z","updated_at":"2015-12-20T10:56:33Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/6312","html_url":"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6312","diff_url":"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6312.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6312.patch"},"body":"Essentially enforces sequence numbers as a relative lock-time as an IsStandard() rule to make it easy to test applications using it; blocks containing transactions with invalid sequence numbers given the age of their inputs per BIP 68 are still accepted.\r\n\r\nThis pull-req is *not* a soft-fork nor does it contain any code to start that process.\r\n\r\nThis pull request builds on top of #6177.\r\n\r\nBackground: [BIP 68, Consensus-enforced transaction replacement signalled via sequence numbers](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0068.mediawiki)"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/comments/166109869","html_url":"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6312#issuecomment-166109869","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6312","id":166109869,"user":{"login":"jtimon","id":1008458,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1008458?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon","html_url":"https://github.com/jtimon","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jtimon/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-12-20T10:56:33Z","updated_at":"2015-12-20T10:56:33Z","body":"@NicolasDorier Well, if it was a bugfix then it's not sad that it was squashed, is it?\r\nI mean more the later changes to make the function a pure function, which is, I assume the less reviewed changes @morcos is concerned with.\r\n\r\nIn my opinion no optimization had been needed in the mining code this could have been merged before 0.12 with no backporting problems. If the optimizations hadn't been urgent they could have been later during 0.13.99. But now it's too late for that, thus the need for #7176 . All the possible fixes could be built on top of the same branch (this one, for example) to compare them more easily, but seems not everybody agrees that a common base makes branches easier because I have already say this without the different proponents agreeing on a common base, and @maaku seems to be the only other person that thinks #7187 should be based on this PR instead of #7184 so I shouldn't insist on this.\r\n"}}