Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Relative CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY (was CLTV proposal)

From: Tier Nolan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 23:09:59 +0100

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Jorge Timón <[email-masked]> wrote:

>
> This gives you less flexibility and I don't think it's necessary.
> Please let's try to avoid this if it's possible.

It is just a switch that turns on and off the new mode.

In retrospect, it would be better to just up the transaction version.

In transactions from v2 onwards, the sequence field means height.  That
means legacy transactions would be spendable.

This is a pure soft-fork.