From 192f2aca2f570e8ff8ebf6a57ab9b7c7ad76ed52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jesus Christ <120573631+Gudnessuche@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2024 23:05:00 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Update for BIP 68 & 112

Given that both BIPs are now final, calling them drafts, seem very stale.
---
 bip-0125.mediawiki | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/bip-0125.mediawiki b/bip-0125.mediawiki
index ca9c8247..f4060cfa 100644
--- a/bip-0125.mediawiki
+++ b/bip-0125.mediawiki
@@ -151,8 +151,8 @@ of full-RBF.
 There are no known problematic interactions between opt-in full-RBF and
 other uses of nSequence. Specifically, opt-in full-RBF is compatible
 with consensus-enforced locktime as provided in the Bitcoin 0.1
-implementation, draft BIP68 (Relative lock-time using consensus-enforced
-sequence numbers), and draft BIP112 (CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY).
+implementation, BIP68 (Relative lock-time using consensus-enforced
+sequence numbers), and BIP112 (CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY).
 
 ==Deployment==