Bitcoin bridge update #17
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
added 5 commits
October 7, 2024 22:33
# Documentation Pull Request Template
## Description
This pull request updates the Bitcoin bridge documentation to improve clarity, accuracy, and completeness. The main changes are:
1. Update time-lock to 1 week based on current DRT implementation
2. Add information on current operator fee and mining fees
3. Ensure proper nesting in points of deposit process
4. Minor improvements to the withdrawal process description for better clarity.
These updates aim to provide more accurate and up-to-date information about the Bitcoin bridge operations, enhancing user understanding and reducing potential misinterpretations.
---
## Type of Change
- [ ] New Document
- [x] Update to Existing Document
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Question/clarification
- [ ] Other (please describe):
---
## Related Issues
Fixes #[issue number related to documentation update, if any]
---
## Checklist
- [x] I have reviewed the existing documentation to avoid duplication.
- [x] The new or updated document includes clear and concise information.
- [ ] All relevant sections (e.g., introduction, usage examples, references)
are included.
- [x] The document follows the project's style guide and formatting rules.
- [ ] I have included any necessary references or external resources.
- [x] Spellcheck and grammar check have been performed.
- [x] (For updates) I have verified that the changes reflect the current state
of the project.
---
## Additional Information
The updates to the time-lock period and fee information reflect the current implementation of the Bitcoin bridge. The restructuring of certain sections aims to improve readability and reduce potential misunderstandings.
---
## Reviewer Checklist
- [ ] The purpose and scope of the document are clear.
- [ ] The document is easy to understand and follow.
- [ ] There are no typos or grammatical errors.
- [ ] All necessary sections are included and well-structured.
- [ ] The document is consistent with the project's style guide.
- [ ] Any referenced links or resources are valid and appropriate.
storopoli
requested changes
Oct 9, 2024
docs/technical/bitcoin-bridge.md
Outdated
Comment on lines
66
to
70
| 1. "Deposit path", an $N$-of-$N$ multisig path, | ||
| where $N$ is the number of operators in the bridge. | ||
| 1. "Take back" path, | ||
| which allows the user to take back their funds if the bridge fails to | ||
| move funds from the Deposit Request Transaction (DRT) | ||
| into the bridge address within a two-week period, | ||
| i.e. it is time-locked and the user provides a signature to spend it. | ||
| - "Deposit path", an $N$-of-$N$ multisig path, | ||
| where $N$ is the number of operators in the bridge. | ||
| - "Take back" path, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why change this to unordered?
I think that order here matters.
From my understanding, in the inherent merkle tree, we have the deposit path first then the take back path second right? Cc @Rajil1213
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah this should only fix the indentation and not the type of list.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried some variations but in mk docs markdown the sub-points seems to automatically use a different list type (1. vs a.). so the subpoints can only be a. , b. at the moment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can do fine with the a. and b..
I don't know if this is easily configurable: https://squidfunk.github.io/mkdocs-material/reference/lists/#using-ordered-lists
The point is that order matters, this cannot be an unordered list.
storopoli
requested changes
Oct 9, 2024
docs/technical/bitcoin-bridge.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| This transaction has some metadata attached to it, in the form of an `OP_RETURN` | ||
| output, that can be up to 80 bytes long (according to bitcoin standardness policy), | ||
| and is composed of the following data: | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Magic bytes. | ||
| These take $11$ bytes and are used to identify the bridge. | ||
| 1. "Take back" TapLeaf hash. | ||
| 2. "Take back" TapLeaf hash. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
mind the diff
Suggested change
| 2. "Take back" TapLeaf hash. | |
| 1. "Take back" TapLeaf hash. |
docs/technical/bitcoin-bridge.md
Outdated
| These take $32$ bytes and are used to validate the | ||
| Deposit Request Transaction (DRT), | ||
| while also necessary for the control block required | ||
| to spend the P2TR output via the $N$-of-$N$ Tapscript. | ||
| 1. Execution Layer (EL) address. | ||
| 3. Execution Layer (EL) address. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
mind the diff
Suggested change
| 3. Execution Layer (EL) address. | |
| 1. Execution Layer (EL) address. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Type of Change
Related Issues
Link any related issues or pull requests here.
Use the format
Fixes #issue-numberto automatically close the related issuewhen this pull request is merged.
Checklist
are included.
of the project.
Reviewer Checklist