-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.4k
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
feat: burn rune through forcing Cenotaph #3683
feat: burn rune through forcing Cenotaph #3683
Conversation
I implemented a generic burn in #3437. Can extend that to support runes? |
I'll have a look at generic burning first (#3437) but probably we don't want to do protocol level burning through cenotaphs but rather by sending to an |
I merged #3437, since burning through OP_RETURN is more generic and can be used for inscriptions, sats and runes. |
Happy to work on this as well @raphjaph |
Yes, burning a rune should be part of For "etching" do you mean the optional parent inscription of the rune? This can already be done with the new command. @onchainguy-btc is tweaking it so it only burns a single sat instead of the whole utxo it is in. |
Also this, but more destroying the rune itself, so it is totally trashed, no one can mint/transfer it anymore, would it make sense? |
An etching can't retroactively destroy all runes it "minted". Once they are on Bitcoin they're no longer owned by the original creator |
So once an etching is confirmed, it can't prevent new mints, or can't be modified in any shape or form, or even be "transferred" to another owner? |
that's correct, only the parent (if it exists) can be transferred. |
fixes: #3640
add a command to burn all specific runes in a wallet
Logic
Test
I think it can be fine - grained further to burn exact amount in a wallet through protocol recognized burn addresses. However, changes to updater are required to recognize the burn addresses. Changes to updater can be a lenghtly review process as it touches the core, so probably in another PR. Which burn addresses can be a topic for debates @raphjaph
However, in this PR, I still include burn address constants for reviews