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

Add changes to lock_btc event in RSKIP 170 #182

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

marcos-iov
Copy link
Contributor

Additionally:

  • Updated the example output, it had 2 extra zeroes in the protocol version number
  • Updated references to list in the order they appear in the text

@marcos-iov marcos-iov requested review from SergioDemianLerner and a team November 6, 2020 20:02
IPs/RSKIP170.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@marcos-iov marcos-iov force-pushed the rskip170-update branch 2 times, most recently from 0a23ad6 to 65e4709 Compare November 9, 2020 14:55
Copy link
Contributor

@josedahlquist josedahlquist left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

other than the small typo LGTM


Signature:

`lock_btc(address indexed receiver, bytes32 btcTxHash, string senderBtcAddress, int256 amount)`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
`lock_btc(address indexed receiver, bytes32 btcTxHash, string senderBtcAddress, int256 amount)`
`pegin_btc(address indexed receiver, bytes32 btcTxHash, string senderBtcAddress, int256 amount)`

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's the signature of the "old" event lock_btc. The signature for the new event is below

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