Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix Mapping, Remove Dummy UTXOs, Support Edge Cases (current) #29

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

p0stcapone
Copy link

Addressing: #2

Refactor of selectUtxos() and generatePsbtBuyingInscription()

-Inscriptions will now always be at satIndex 0 of the taker's receiving output
-Dummy UTXOs to assert index match requirements of sighashsingle are now unecessary

With the new PSBT construction, the inscribed output may in many cases be the last output of the transaction. In any cases where the fees for the PSBT would result in the inscribed output being less than 2k sats in value, the taker will be required to provide additional inputs to cover these fees. If the additional inputs provided are also sufficient to add padding back to the inscribed output, they will be used (up to 10k value). -Note: The taker still owns these sats, they're just preserving the padding.

This is an updated pull request reflecting the current features for openordex

I'm uncertain why the diff generated is being stubborn.

All changes refer to

selectUtxos()
generatePsbtBuyingInscription()
updatePayerAddress()

Changes can be found both in the function definitions and as they are called.

p0stcapone and others added 3 commits March 10, 2023 21:01
This refactor corrects the previous mapping errors as well as adds edge case support to manage the inscribed output size.
@rot13maxi
Copy link

this is showing up in GH as +1,022 −1,094. Needs a rebase maybe?

@rot13maxi
Copy link

Can you add an explanation of the proposed construction to the README? Would be great to be able to look at/talk through the PSBT construction and then compare intent to implementation.

@rot13maxi
Copy link

tried to fix the weird diff'ing issues. PR against your fork here:
p0stcapone#1

diff against upstream here:
#30

@p0stcapone
Copy link
Author

Closing in favor of: #30

Reason: Rebase more clearly demonstrates the diff.

@p0stcapone p0stcapone closed this Mar 12, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants