Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime

From: Jorge Timón <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 23:32:57 +0200

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Joseph Poon <[email-masked]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 09:21:36AM -0700, Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> If anyone feels strongly about this, please speak up.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:37 AM, Jorge Tim??n <
>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> > I repeated my nit on https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/179
>
> I am also indifferent, but also dislike technical debt.
>
> It should maybe be noted for those who wish to do/write-code-for mempool
> transaction selection (irrespective of one's opinion on it) that lower
> is better, since transactions with shorter relative locks are
> transactions with "higher priority".

That policy code should be simple to change, but thank you for pointing it out.
Also thank you for declaring your position (indifference) on the subject.