Implement simple taproot channels #679
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
sstone
force-pushed
the
snapshot/simple-taproot-channels
branch
2 times, most recently
from
38b3801
to
b940cee
Compare
sstone
force-pushed
the
snapshot/simple-taproot-channels
branch
from
b940cee
to
74efe90
Compare
sstone
force-pushed
the
snapshot/simple-taproot-channels
branch
2 times, most recently
from
760fa3c
to
20348b2
Compare
sstone
force-pushed
the
snapshot/simple-taproot-channels
branch
from
20348b2
to
239f7dd
Compare
sstone
force-pushed
the
snapshot/simple-taproot-channels
branch
from
239f7dd
to
cfcd123
Compare
sstone
force-pushed
the
snapshot/simple-taproot-channels
branch
from
cfcd123
to
e5671a1
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is the "companion PR" for ACINQ/eclair#2868, with the same implementation choices adapted for
lightning-kmp.Note for reviewers: ACINQ/eclair#2868 should be reviewed first, reviewing this PR should then be fairly straightforward.