12017-01-16T00:06:03  *** Saucery has quit IRC
  22017-01-16T00:22:49  <BlueMatt> ryanofsky: yo
  32017-01-16T00:23:02  <BlueMatt> whats the status of listunspent in #8456
  42017-01-16T00:23:06  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8456 | [RPC] Simplified bumpfee command. by mrbandrews · Pull Request #8456 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
  52017-01-16T00:31:44  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  62017-01-16T00:31:45  <BlueMatt> morcos: as pointed out on github, there are some uses for getbalance "*" that I dont think we can break yet (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8183#issuecomment-272598823) so I think this needs fixing in some way for bumpfee
  72017-01-16T00:49:02  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82017-01-16T01:39:17  *** jtimon has quit IRC
  92017-01-16T01:43:10  <morcos> BlueMatt: I still haven't investigated thoroughly myself yet, but you left a comment on 8456 about getbalance ""?
 102017-01-16T01:43:26  <morcos> Forget about getbalance "", that's done, its been broken since 0.11, got worse in 0.12
 112017-01-16T01:43:56  <morcos> Regardless of bumpfee, it uses GetAccountBalance
 122017-01-16T01:44:07  <morcos> and that is unsupported
 132017-01-16T01:47:29  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 142017-01-16T01:50:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
 152017-01-16T01:50:56  <morcos> getbalance "*" is a different question, b/c i agree we need a way to return watch only balances..  so i think something should be done..
 162017-01-16T01:51:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 172017-01-16T01:51:52  <morcos> so to me it's a question of how much bumpfee messes up getbalance "*"
 182017-01-16T01:55:33  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
 192017-01-16T01:57:37  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 202017-01-16T02:05:17  <morcos> BlueMatt: Wait a second...  How does bumpfee change the output of getbalance "*" anyway?
 212017-01-16T02:06:00  <morcos> Are you sure its not just broken for any time you have double spends in your wallet (until one of them is confirmed)
 222017-01-16T02:24:18  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 232017-01-16T02:31:37  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 242017-01-16T02:51:51  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 252017-01-16T02:52:27  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 262017-01-16T03:11:05  *** droark has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 272017-01-16T03:11:13  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 282017-01-16T03:12:44  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
 292017-01-16T03:17:07  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 302017-01-16T03:17:12  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 312017-01-16T03:18:17  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 322017-01-16T04:06:15  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 332017-01-16T04:10:26  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 342017-01-16T04:11:31  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 352017-01-16T04:40:52  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 362017-01-16T05:09:23  *** harrymm has quit IRC
 372017-01-16T05:12:53  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 382017-01-16T05:14:29  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 392017-01-16T05:16:00  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 402017-01-16T06:39:35  *** kadoban has quit IRC
 412017-01-16T07:04:02  *** cannon-c has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 422017-01-16T07:18:43  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 432017-01-16T08:10:33  *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 442017-01-16T08:10:49  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 452017-01-16T08:15:02  *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
 462017-01-16T08:15:38  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 472017-01-16T08:20:00  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 482017-01-16T08:26:29  *** BitBully has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 492017-01-16T08:31:38  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 502017-01-16T08:35:07  *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 512017-01-16T08:41:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
 522017-01-16T08:41:29  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532017-01-16T08:42:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 542017-01-16T08:52:59  *** BitBully has quit IRC
 552017-01-16T09:00:22  *** waxwing has quit IRC
 562017-01-16T09:12:25  *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 572017-01-16T09:35:56  *** cannon-c is now known as cannon-c_AFK
 582017-01-16T09:46:35  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 592017-01-16T10:02:53  *** cannon-c_AFK is now known as cannon-c
 602017-01-16T10:19:05  *** davec has quit IRC
 612017-01-16T10:24:56  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 622017-01-16T10:34:19  <jonasschnelli> Ping BlueMatt luke-jr: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9294
 632017-01-16T10:41:41  <cannon-c> Quick question, I am looking to using bitcoin core in conjunction with ssss (Shamirs secret sharing scheme)
 642017-01-16T10:42:06  <cannon-c> to create fragmented seed backups which can be re-created using pre-defined threshold of number of shares
 652017-01-16T10:42:24  <cannon-c> Does Core already have something like this?
 662017-01-16T10:42:35  <cannon-c> I dont want to duplicate something that already exists
 672017-01-16T10:43:40  *** BitBully has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 682017-01-16T10:44:47  <cannon-c> One use case, creating the xpriv on airgap system, with fragmented backup as contingency of access
 692017-01-16T10:44:58  <cannon-c> to family if something happens to me
 702017-01-16T10:45:42  <cannon-c> or great for distributed backups
 712017-01-16T10:47:00  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 722017-01-16T10:51:04  *** thermoman has quit IRC
 732017-01-16T10:53:44  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 742017-01-16T10:55:24  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 752017-01-16T11:19:14  *** trotski2000 has quit IRC
 762017-01-16T11:19:14  *** trotski2000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 772017-01-16T11:19:14  *** trotski2000 has quit IRC
 782017-01-16T11:19:14  *** trotski2000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 792017-01-16T11:22:17  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 802017-01-16T11:27:29  *** To7 has quit IRC
 812017-01-16T11:31:40  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 822017-01-16T11:33:29  *** BitBully has quit IRC
 832017-01-16T11:37:14  *** BitBully has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 842017-01-16T11:37:16  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 852017-01-16T11:45:10  *** To7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 862017-01-16T11:57:20  <btcdrak> jonasschnelli: testing
 872017-01-16T12:16:52  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 882017-01-16T12:35:02  <jonasschnelli> btcdrak: thanks!
 892017-01-16T12:44:57  *** BitBully has quit IRC
 902017-01-16T12:52:14  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
 912017-01-16T13:14:47  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 922017-01-16T13:16:23  *** BitBully has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 932017-01-16T13:20:00  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 942017-01-16T13:20:04  *** BitBully has quit IRC
 952017-01-16T13:35:35  *** xinxi has quit IRC
 962017-01-16T13:40:50  *** waxwing has quit IRC
 972017-01-16T13:43:57  *** xinxi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982017-01-16T13:46:00  <morcos> wumpus: I think #9380 is *almost* ready for merge, ideally it would be merged in time to keep the translation strings for -blockmintxfee.   I think the only open question is if people prefer a different name for -dustrelayfee.
 992017-01-16T13:46:01  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9380 | Separate different uses of minimum fees by morcos · Pull Request #9380 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1002017-01-16T13:50:52  *** BitBully has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-01-16T13:58:28  *** BitBully has quit IRC
1022017-01-16T14:00:09  *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1032017-01-16T14:00:23  <instagibbs> cannon-c, try #bitcoin
1042017-01-16T14:00:48  *** cannon-c has quit IRC
1052017-01-16T14:01:59  *** BitBully has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062017-01-16T14:05:59  *** BitBully has quit IRC
1072017-01-16T14:26:31  *** instagibbs has quit IRC
1082017-01-16T14:26:50  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1092017-01-16T14:39:44  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1102017-01-16T14:58:16  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112017-01-16T15:07:07  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1122017-01-16T15:08:36  *** dmrche has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132017-01-16T15:12:38  *** xinxi has quit IRC
1142017-01-16T15:18:06  *** Hmbryjb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152017-01-16T15:22:40  *** Hmbryjb has quit IRC
1162017-01-16T15:24:31  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1172017-01-16T15:26:22  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1182017-01-16T16:08:50  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1192017-01-16T16:14:51  *** Netmage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202017-01-16T16:15:39  *** cryptapus_afk has quit IRC
1212017-01-16T16:16:02  *** cryptapus_afk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1222017-01-16T16:16:03  *** cryptapus_afk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232017-01-16T16:23:23  *** cryptapus_afk has quit IRC
1242017-01-16T16:24:57  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252017-01-16T16:35:56  *** PRab has quit IRC
1262017-01-16T16:39:54  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1272017-01-16T16:39:54  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1282017-01-16T16:52:00  *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292017-01-16T17:08:56  *** jannes has quit IRC
1302017-01-16T17:20:45  *** BashCo has quit IRC
1312017-01-16T17:21:22  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322017-01-16T17:22:34  *** BitBully has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332017-01-16T17:23:21  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1342017-01-16T17:26:02  *** BashCo has quit IRC
1352017-01-16T17:29:05  *** BitBully has quit IRC
1362017-01-16T17:40:55  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372017-01-16T17:47:35  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382017-01-16T17:49:26  *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1392017-01-16T17:51:56  *** waxwing has quit IRC
1402017-01-16T17:54:18  *** Raptor186 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1412017-01-16T17:58:59  *** cryptapus is now known as cryptapus_afk
1422017-01-16T18:16:44  *** wvr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432017-01-16T18:17:33  <jtimon> morcos: re #9380 I would leave -dustrelayfee, or change to -dustfee maybe, no strong opinion on my part
1442017-01-16T18:17:35  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9380 | Separate different uses of minimum fees by morcos · Pull Request #9380 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1452017-01-16T18:29:27  *** Raptor186 has quit IRC
1462017-01-16T18:33:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 4 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8a445c5651ed...dd98f0453824
1472017-01-16T18:33:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master daec955 Alex Morcos: Introduce -blockmintxfee
1482017-01-16T18:33:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7b1add3 Alex Morcos: Introduce -incrementalrelayfee
1492017-01-16T18:33:39  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master eb30d1a Alex Morcos: Introduce -dustrelayfee
1502017-01-16T18:33:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9380: Separate different uses of minimum fees (master...minfees) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9380
1512017-01-16T19:00:01  *** kadoban has quit IRC
1522017-01-16T19:18:31  *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1532017-01-16T19:23:49  *** PRab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1542017-01-16T19:28:05  *** mol has quit IRC
1552017-01-16T19:31:38  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1562017-01-16T19:35:34  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1572017-01-16T19:35:50  *** dmrche has quit IRC
1582017-01-16T19:41:40  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1592017-01-16T19:50:37  <BlueMatt> morcos: the difference is that bumpfee takes us to a world where having "double spends" in your wallet is entirely supported
1602017-01-16T19:50:58  <morcos> It's already supported once we merged BIP 152
1612017-01-16T19:51:03  <morcos> uh
1622017-01-16T19:51:04  <morcos> 125
1632017-01-16T19:51:05  <morcos> whatever
1642017-01-16T19:51:22  <BlueMatt> instead of, previously, you'd have to do something unsupported like run your wallet on multiple machines to get it
1652017-01-16T19:51:24  <BlueMatt> hmm?
1662017-01-16T19:51:27  <morcos> actually it was supported even before that
1672017-01-16T19:51:36  <BlueMatt> only abandon transaction supported it?
1682017-01-16T19:51:40  <BlueMatt> well, you generating them, that is
1692017-01-16T19:51:43  <BlueMatt> you receiving them maybe
1702017-01-16T19:51:49  <morcos> yeah exactly
1712017-01-16T19:52:04  <BlueMatt> but now we are actively supporting you generating them
1722017-01-16T19:52:07  <BlueMatt> which is a huge difference
1732017-01-16T19:52:16  <BlueMatt> (is getbalance "*" broken for receiving double spends, too?)
1742017-01-16T19:52:33  <morcos> and previously you could generate them yourself also...
1752017-01-16T19:52:40  <BlueMatt> manually, sure
1762017-01-16T19:52:50  <BlueMatt> but "unsupported, might break getbalance" is perfectly reasonable in that case
1772017-01-16T19:53:02  <morcos> the only thing stopping you from doing it automatically would be if your mempool had your original spend
1782017-01-16T19:53:05  <morcos> so the coins didn't show up
1792017-01-16T19:53:27  <morcos> so if it came out of your mempool for any reason...  expired after 3 days for instance
1802017-01-16T19:53:51  <BlueMatt> hmm? we re-add your txn to mempool?
1812017-01-16T19:53:54  <morcos> nothing stopping you from double spending...  with 0.12, we made it so you had to abandon it first but that wasn't a requirement before that
1822017-01-16T19:54:01  <BlueMatt> so only abandon would stop it?
1832017-01-16T19:54:30  <morcos> i'm saying if you automatically created tx A, then A was evicted from your mempool, never made it in, or was expired
1842017-01-16T19:54:30  <BlueMatt> i mean sure, if you manually createrawtransaction/signrawtransaction you could doublespend easily
1852017-01-16T19:54:40  <BlueMatt> if it was expired it would be re-added
1862017-01-16T19:54:45  <morcos> nothing would prevent you from doing an sendtoaddress and creating A' doublespend
1872017-01-16T19:54:49  <morcos> no it wouldn't
1882017-01-16T19:54:52  <morcos> we just added that
1892017-01-16T19:54:52  <BlueMatt> oh?
1902017-01-16T19:54:56  <BlueMatt> wait, what?
1912017-01-16T19:55:06  <BlueMatt> we've always re-announced transactions on a regular basis?
1922017-01-16T19:55:20  <morcos> reannounce txs already in your mempool
1932017-01-16T19:55:47  <BlueMatt> I mean to be clear, I'm fine with some documentation noting that getbalance "*" is broken, and should not be used, and is made worse with bumpfee
1942017-01-16T19:55:47  <morcos> i'm inflating my argument slightly, since before mempool limiting, things didn't really fall out of your mempool very much
1952017-01-16T19:55:50  <BlueMatt> really?
1962017-01-16T19:56:01  <BlueMatt> yea, ok, i suppose thats why
1972017-01-16T19:56:09  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1982017-01-16T19:56:27  <morcos> See #9290
1992017-01-16T19:56:29  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9290 | Make RelayWalletTransaction attempt to AcceptToMemoryPool. by gmaxwell · Pull Request #9290 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2002017-01-16T19:56:38  <BlueMatt> ahh
2012017-01-16T19:57:27  <morcos> Anyway, i guess my point is its not fair to accept a bumpfee PR to take on fixing years of broken code just b/c it might lead to the bugs being exposed more...
2022017-01-16T19:57:34  <morcos> the bugs are exposed more by allowing double spends
2032017-01-16T19:57:39  <morcos> we've already crossed that bridge
2042017-01-16T19:57:59  <morcos> its stupid to say we won't make it easier for you b/c our code is broken in some ways reporting on them
2052017-01-16T19:58:15  <BlueMatt> well i believe the bugs are only currently exposed if you're doing something entirely unsupported (or, in the case fixed by #9290 by bugs which we need to/did fix)
2062017-01-16T19:58:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9290 | Make RelayWalletTransaction attempt to AcceptToMemoryPool. by gmaxwell · Pull Request #9290 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2072017-01-16T19:58:39  <morcos> i don't really feel strongly about merging bumpfee for 0.14..   thats not really what i'm arguing about.. and i think your last minute concerns are a good reflection that it seems a bit rushed trying to get it in
2082017-01-16T19:58:43  <BlueMatt> considering its deprecated I dont see why we cant just put a note in the docs and say "this is broken"
2092017-01-16T19:59:04  <BlueMatt> (bumpfee "*", that is)
2102017-01-16T19:59:09  <morcos> i just don't think that when we decide it is ready to merge we should be weighing it down with the responsiblity of fixign eveyrthing else
2112017-01-16T19:59:41  <morcos> why don't you think bugs are exposed if you receive a double spend?
2122017-01-16T19:59:44  <BlueMatt> agreed, totally get that, but in this case I do think we are exposing bugs which were only previously exposed if the user was doing something insane
2132017-01-16T19:59:49  <morcos> a BIP 125 compatible one
2142017-01-16T19:59:56  <BlueMatt> though, really, if bumpfee slips 0.14, we should just remove accounts for 0.14
2152017-01-16T19:59:57  <morcos> thats not insance at all
2162017-01-16T20:00:03  <BlueMatt> then bumpfee isnt exposing shit :p
2172017-01-16T20:00:27  <BlueMatt> are the bugs exposed if you receive a bumpfee from someone else? I havent thought that far into it
2182017-01-16T20:00:55  <morcos> ah
2192017-01-16T20:00:58  <morcos> perhaps not...
2202017-01-16T20:01:04  <BlueMatt> no, asking, i have no idea
2212017-01-16T20:01:14  <BlueMatt> not saying i dont think they are, just havent looked
2222017-01-16T20:01:26  <morcos> well the issue is 0-confirm things reduce your balance, regardless of whether they are in the mempool or not
2232017-01-16T20:01:47  <morcos> if its a tx from someoen else, it won't add to yoru balance if its 0 confirm period...
2242017-01-16T20:02:20  <morcos> but i bet getbalance "*" 0 is broken if you receive a double spend
2252017-01-16T20:03:05  <BlueMatt> could see that, but getbalance "*" 1 can go negative with bumpfee, I believe
2262017-01-16T20:03:14  <morcos> anyway... i just don't think bumpfee CHANGES anything about this...
2272017-01-16T20:03:35  <BlueMatt> or maybe not?
2282017-01-16T20:04:09  <morcos> lets just agree it shouldn't be fixed on the bumpfee PR...  i'll argue less (or none) about saying we shouldn't do a release with bumpfee before its fixed
2292017-01-16T20:04:21  <BlueMatt> if I'm right (and might not be), during normal use of the wallet, getbalance "*" 1 is (probaboy, I think?) correct, and is currently the only way to get your balance if you include watchonly
2302017-01-16T20:04:27  <BlueMatt> with bumpfee, I believe, this changes
2312017-01-16T20:04:31  <BlueMatt> so it is no longer correct
2322017-01-16T20:05:36  <BlueMatt> unrelatedly, did we document the listunspent changes for bumpfee?
2332017-01-16T20:05:45  <BlueMatt> I do think that needs documentation, if no code changes
2342017-01-16T20:06:19  <morcos> yeah.. i actually think we should probably just return the txs in listunspent
2352017-01-16T20:06:34  <BlueMatt> both of them?
2362017-01-16T20:06:36  <BlueMatt> that seems shit
2372017-01-16T20:06:43  <morcos> its trivial to do b/c listunspent already passes a fOnlyConfirmed bool set to fallse to AvailableCoins that no other uses of it do
2382017-01-16T20:06:52  <BlueMatt> (does it currently return abandoned tx or tx not in mempool?)
2392017-01-16T20:06:59  <morcos> i think so
2402017-01-16T20:07:13  <morcos> i don't know let me check
2412017-01-16T20:07:53  <BlueMatt> no, it just calls AvailableCoins
2422017-01-16T20:08:00  <BlueMatt> so only if its "trusted" and in mempool
2432017-01-16T20:08:14  <morcos> no it doesn't check IsTrusted
2442017-01-16T20:08:20  <morcos> but you are right it checks the mempool
2452017-01-16T20:08:20  <BlueMatt> wait, no, wtf is fOnlyConfirmed
2462017-01-16T20:08:30  <BlueMatt> oh, yes, you're right
2472017-01-16T20:08:45  <morcos> which maybe is exactly what we want?
2482017-01-16T20:09:34  <BlueMatt> I think if we add an fOnlyConfirmed to both of the replaces/replaced checks that would be least-surprising to users
2492017-01-16T20:09:44  <morcos> agreed
2502017-01-16T20:09:45  <BlueMatt> but, frankly, I'm open to anything that is documented
2512017-01-16T20:10:43  <BlueMatt> would you like me to go finish review assuming that gets fixed? if we feel it could still be merged for 0.14 I'm happy to
2522017-01-16T20:10:53  <BlueMatt> not sure how wumpus or sipa feel about it now
2532017-01-16T20:12:11  <morcos> ehh...  if it was me, i'd put it in 0.14..  but i'm not going to advocate for it...   maybe gmaxwell feels strongly?
2542017-01-16T20:12:32  <morcos> i think #9294 is maybe higher priority
2552017-01-16T20:12:35  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9294 | Use internal HD chain for change outputs (hd split) by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9294 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2562017-01-16T20:12:35  <BlueMatt> I mean the way i have left to review this is to literally go read all of wallet and rpcwallet
2572017-01-16T20:12:48  <BlueMatt> is that still waiting on fixes?
2582017-01-16T20:12:57  <BlueMatt> oh, no, ok, will review that one at least
2592017-01-16T20:13:04  <morcos> i don't know.. i just started reading BIP 32..   ha
2602017-01-16T20:14:23  <sdaftuar> if we're concerned about bumpfee for 0.14, i think we could merge it and mark it as experimental?  i'm also ok with merging after the 0.14 split and use the 0.15 release cycle as time to get the bugs out while it simmers in master
2612017-01-16T20:14:30  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: you around?
2622017-01-16T20:15:04  <sdaftuar> i'd be concerned about holding it up further though for unreleated walelt bugs that it exposes
2632017-01-16T20:15:25  <BlueMatt> sdaftuar: well the only thing I found so far that really is a problem, I think, is listunspent
2642017-01-16T20:15:48  <BlueMatt> the getbalance "*" thing I really hate, but am not sure is a reasonable fix
2652017-01-16T20:16:37  * BlueMatt is still hoping #9561 and #9535 get another last-minute review or two and get merged
2662017-01-16T20:16:38  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9561 | Wake message handling thread when we receive a new block by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9561 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2672017-01-16T20:16:40  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9535 | Split CNode::cs_vSend: message processing and message sending by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9535 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2682017-01-16T20:16:42  <BlueMatt> but it seems like no one is around today :(
2692017-01-16T20:16:46  <BlueMatt> damn holidays
2702017-01-16T20:16:50  <BlueMatt> always getting in the way
2712017-01-16T20:17:40  <sdaftuar> yeah i think listunspent could be a fix-by-documentation, at least for now.  makes more sense if we indicate bumpfee is an experimental feature?
2722017-01-16T20:18:17  <BlueMatt> im fine with that
2732017-01-16T20:18:50  <BlueMatt> though I think the above-discussed fix might also be sufficient
2742017-01-16T20:20:25  <BlueMatt> would just need a quick pass to check all the other places fOnlyConfirmed is set in callers
2752017-01-16T20:20:56  *** owowo has quit IRC
2762017-01-16T20:23:20  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2772017-01-16T20:28:57  <morcos> BlueMatt: i already did that, only set by listunspent
2782017-01-16T20:29:10  <BlueMatt> cool
2792017-01-16T20:29:50  <morcos> what about #9499, that is a pretty big win if you ask me... especially without multiple block downloads
2802017-01-16T20:29:52  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9499 | Use recent-rejects, orphans, and recently-replaced txn for compact-block-reconstruction by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9499 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2812017-01-16T20:30:26  <BlueMatt> yes, and probably has enough review to get a merge, I'd say
2822017-01-16T20:33:11  <sipa> BlueMatt: i'll do another pass today
2832017-01-16T20:33:16  <sipa> now meeting ethan
2842017-01-16T20:33:17  <BlueMatt> thanks
2852017-01-16T20:33:24  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/b0819c7e9b428631b806d97ff19beb2e218df31f
2862017-01-16T20:33:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b0819c7 Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: periodic translations update
2872017-01-16T20:33:27  <BlueMatt> cool, tell him i said hi
2882017-01-16T20:39:45  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2892017-01-16T20:44:22  *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
2902017-01-16T20:47:16  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2912017-01-16T20:47:25  <sipa> he says hello
2922017-01-16T20:58:14  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2932017-01-16T21:03:58  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
2942017-01-16T21:04:11  *** instagibbs has quit IRC
2952017-01-16T21:11:14  *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962017-01-16T21:13:12  * instagibbs attempting 9561 review
2972017-01-16T21:13:23  <instagibbs> 9499 is def ready
2982017-01-16T21:17:11  *** kvnn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2992017-01-16T21:24:34  *** To7 has quit IRC
3002017-01-16T21:30:10  <sipa> #9499
3012017-01-16T21:30:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9499 | Use recent-rejects, orphans, and recently-replaced txn for compact-block-reconstruction by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9499 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3022017-01-16T21:30:17  <sipa> #9561
3032017-01-16T21:30:19  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9561 | Wake message handling thread when we receive a new block by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9561 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3042017-01-16T21:30:24  <sipa> agree
3052017-01-16T21:31:34  <instagibbs> oops, I meant 9535
3062017-01-16T21:31:49  <instagibbs> for my attempted review...
3072017-01-16T21:32:21  <sipa> #9535
3082017-01-16T21:32:23  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9535 | Split CNode::cs_vSend: message processing and message sending by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9535 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3092017-01-16T21:38:45  <cfields> agree on all of those
3102017-01-16T21:39:39  <BlueMatt> #9484 obv
3112017-01-16T21:39:41  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9484 | Introduce assumevalid setting to skip validation presumed valid scripts. by gmaxwell · Pull Request #9484 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3122017-01-16T21:40:48  <cfields> ah right, i need to sync up and ack the hash
3132017-01-16T21:41:04  <cfields> (i'm sure it's fine :)
3142017-01-16T21:42:17  <sipa> no, you should not be sure it is fine
3152017-01-16T21:42:37  <sipa> (i, however, am)
3162017-01-16T21:44:14  <BlueMatt> I did validate that hash prior to ack
3172017-01-16T21:49:38  <BlueMatt> if we're willing to push a day, I think both #9294 and #8456 could make it, but not sure they're gonna make it today
3182017-01-16T21:49:40  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9294 | Use internal HD chain for change outputs (hd split) by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9294 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3192017-01-16T21:49:42  <BlueMatt> well, maybe two days
3202017-01-16T21:49:44  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8456 | [RPC] Simplified bumpfee command. by mrbandrews · Pull Request #8456 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3212017-01-16T21:49:57  <BlueMatt> but i do think they're both super close
3222017-01-16T22:07:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b0819c7e9b42...812714fd80e9
3232017-01-16T22:07:55  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e440ac7 Gregory Maxwell: Introduce assumevalid setting to skip presumed valid scripts....
3242017-01-16T22:07:56  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7b5e3fe John Newbery: Add assumevalid testcase...
3252017-01-16T22:07:56  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 812714f Pieter Wuille: Merge #9484: Introduce assumevalid setting to skip validation presumed valid scripts....
3262017-01-16T22:08:09  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #9484: Introduce assumevalid setting to skip validation presumed valid scripts. (master...script_elide_verified) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9484
3272017-01-16T22:22:15  *** waxwing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3282017-01-16T22:39:37  *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3292017-01-16T22:40:15  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3302017-01-16T22:58:51  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #9566: threading: use std::chrono for timestamps (master...nuke-boost-chrono2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9566
3312017-01-16T23:14:45  *** cryptapus_afk is now known as cryptapus
3322017-01-16T23:31:33  *** cryptapus is now known as cryptapus_afk
3332017-01-16T23:47:34  *** wvr has quit IRC
3342017-01-16T23:53:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3352017-01-16T23:58:35  *** abpa has quit IRC