There's a bit of a confusion between the various proposals and CTV itself. Its job is to be a TXID lock and there's not a large design space for that. None of them are competitors to CTV. In fact, CTV has no competitors at all. It's constrained to a primitive and nothing can be added or removed. Jeremy had been working on a few proposals but dropped them in favor of CTV.

Post CTV and we have basic covenants in the market, we can better determine whether we wish for OP_VAULT or OP_CCV (matt). We'll also be able to better analyze whether we want TXHASH or TEMPLATE KEY. In both cases, it would best to have a primitive that acts as a keystone for all future upgrades.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

One thing that is unclear to me is how do you commit to a TXID but then later spend those funds in a different way. This is a missing puzzle piece in my mental model.

Do you use a keypath spend? What about for non-taproot addresses? Do you use a different script branch? If so, how does someone really know their funds are safu on chain without monitoring the CTV UTXO to ensure it hasn't been spent out from under them using this other script path?

I think a simple script example would go a long way towards building understanding, definitely for me, hopefully for others as well.