Matthew Leon

@schildbach rebased. Thanks.

This might not be ideal as-is: I can see that it probably requires overriding `equals` and `compareTo`, at least. Thoughts here?

(my own inclination is to say that despite requiring `equals` and `compareTo` overrides, this is worth it for the added simplicity/clarity)

Have overridden `equals` and `hashCode`, but will leave `compareTo`. Making a sensible override of the `compareTo` inherited from `PrefixedChecksummedBytes` that properly keeps the contract of `compareTo` when compared to other...

`compareTo` issue addressed in a separate PR: https://github.com/bitcoinj/bitcoinj/pull/1844

> Looks good to me. Is this PR dependent on #1844 being merged? Not dependent on #1844 . The `Comparable` implementation here is already inconsistent with `equals` when comparing between...

@paf31 This is now ready for review. I'd never added anything to Hackage before, and thought it might require some changes... But it looks like it doesn't.

> I don't understand your comment about Hackage though. Oh, just that I initially thought that I would need to write some kind of script or metadata file to support...

Adding this here as a related consideration: https://theupdateframework.github.io/ Since hackage implements this, it might not be too hard to steal code from them at some future point. https://github.com/haskell/hackage-security This might...

@Pauan thanks. Good to see I'm not the only one with this concern. I will do some reading and have a think.