Update mesh-specifications to v1.4.15

[sleepdefic1t]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

mesh-sdk-go currently lacks support for Bitcoin's BIP-340 Schnorr Signature scheme, which is vital for aligning with modern Bitcoin standards and ensuring broader cryptographic compatibility.

However, mesh-specifications added support for BIP-340 on November 23rd, 2022, with coinbase/mesh-specifications v1.4.15

Describe the solution you'd like

I propose updating the mesh-specifications version used by mesh-sdk-go from v1.4.12 to the most recent release, (v1.4.15).

This will facilitate support for the BIP-340/Schnorr curve and signature types, which I propose be handled in a subsequent pull request in order to narrow this issue's scope.

Additional context

More insights into this feature can be found in the following discussions:

• Rosetta SDK Go support: https://community.rosetta-api.org/t/question-about-rosetta-sdk-go-prs/824
• Rosetta Specifications Discussion: Add Support for BIP-340 Schnorr mesh-specifications#113

---

Additionally, my team has prepared a fork of mesh-sdk-go using spec v1.4.15 that fully implements BIP-340. We would be happy to provide this either as direct pull requests or as a reference for integrating these changes.

We look forward to your feedback and collaboration and are ready to assist in any way to expedite this process.

(CC @GeekArthur)

[NayiemW]

@jingweicb @GeekArthur Any possibility that we can have this updated in the near future?
We are building a decentralised multi-currency web3 game launcher that utilises Rosetta functionalities.
This issue is currently a blocker for several months.

Thanks in advance.

[sleepdefic1t]

Also, @GeekArthur, would it be correct to assume that the name change to "mesh" is just a rebrand and that — generally speaking — everything else will stay the same?

I'm guessing there will be some sort of announcement being made soon as well?

[sleepdefic1t]

Hello, @GeekArthur @jingweicb @xiaying-peng @potterbm-cb

Just following up. This issue has been open for some time, and we're still interested in seeing it resolved.

Could we get an update on the current status and what's needed to move this forward? We have our implementation ready and are prepared to assist in any way, whether by providing our implementation as a reference or submitting pull requests.

Additionally, we noticed the project name change from "rosetta" to "mesh". Does this affect the scope or timeline of this update?

Any information or guidance you can provide would be greatly appreciated. If there's someone else we should coordinate with, please let us know.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

[ningcb]

@sleepdefic1t - You are willing to put up a PR. We will review it and get it merged.

[sleepdefic1t]

Thank you, @ningcb

I will prepare the changes and open a PR 👍

[sleepdefic1t]

@ningcb PR has been opened (#509)

[potterbm-cb]

@sleepdefic1t

would it be correct to assume that the name change to "mesh" is just a rebrand and that — generally speaking — everything else will stay the same?

that's correct, it's just a name change and everything else is the same

[sleepdefic1t]

Excellent. Thank you @potterbm-cb 🙏