You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We may have to add another rule, to get cursed inscription fully backward compatible: satoshis inscribed with a cursed inscription can be re-inscribed, with a cursed inscription (multiple times) or an inscription (only once).
There are many instances of satoshis that have been mis-inscribed in the past (inscription on 2nd input or whatever), and that were re-inscribed correctly later.
With your current spec, the satoshi would be bound to a cursed inscription with the first transaction, and the second, "legit" inscription would fail (because the satoshi is already bound to a cursed inscription). As a consequence, the inscription number sequence as we know it would break.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We encountered this issue when implementing #2145 - this is a tracking issue to document the solution we implemented to maintain backwards compatibility.
Originally posted by @lgalabru in #2045 (comment)
We may have to add another rule, to get cursed inscription fully backward compatible: satoshis inscribed with a cursed inscription can be re-inscribed, with a cursed inscription (multiple times) or an inscription (only once).
There are many instances of satoshis that have been mis-inscribed in the past (inscription on 2nd input or whatever), and that were re-inscribed correctly later.
With your current spec, the satoshi would be bound to a cursed inscription with the first transaction, and the second, "legit" inscription would fail (because the satoshi is already bound to a cursed inscription). As a consequence, the inscription number sequence as we know it would break.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: