1 2018-01-11T00:00:21  *** esotericnonsense has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
   2 2018-01-11T00:02:01  *** JayBerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
   3 2018-01-11T00:03:33  *** logicue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
   4 2018-01-11T00:05:02  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
   5 2018-01-11T00:05:04  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
   6 2018-01-11T00:05:40  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
   7 2018-01-11T00:10:06  *** Chenpan has quit IRC
   8 2018-01-11T00:12:52  *** logicue has quit IRC
   9 2018-01-11T00:13:17  *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
  10 2018-01-11T00:14:31  <cols> hi
  11 2018-01-11T00:15:17  *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  12 2018-01-11T00:15:48  *** cols has quit IRC
  13 2018-01-11T00:16:56  *** tectonic has quit IRC
  14 2018-01-11T00:17:01  *** JayBerg has quit IRC
  15 2018-01-11T00:20:36  *** Randolf has quit IRC
  16 2018-01-11T00:23:33  *** Squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  17 2018-01-11T00:24:14  *** esotericnonsense has quit IRC
  18 2018-01-11T00:30:28  *** Squidicc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  19 2018-01-11T00:34:43  *** JayBerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  20 2018-01-11T00:36:20  *** nullptr| has quit IRC
  21 2018-01-11T00:42:29  *** nullptr| has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  22 2018-01-11T00:43:24  *** Murch has quit IRC
  23 2018-01-11T00:50:19  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  24 2018-01-11T00:50:55  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  25 2018-01-11T00:53:03  *** larafale has quit IRC
  26 2018-01-11T00:55:05  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  27 2018-01-11T00:56:12  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  28 2018-01-11T00:58:19  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  29 2018-01-11T00:58:36  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  30 2018-01-11T00:58:37  *** esotericnonsense has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  31 2018-01-11T00:58:37  *** promag has quit IRC
  32 2018-01-11T01:03:58  *** hirish is now known as hirishaway
  33 2018-01-11T01:05:30  *** ossifrage has quit IRC
  34 2018-01-11T01:05:54  *** ossifrage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  35 2018-01-11T01:05:57  *** jb55 has quit IRC
  36 2018-01-11T01:11:14  *** Krellan has quit IRC
  37 2018-01-11T01:15:16  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  38 2018-01-11T01:16:49  *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
  39 2018-01-11T01:17:40  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  40 2018-01-11T01:25:16  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  41 2018-01-11T01:25:24  *** bule has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  42 2018-01-11T01:27:32  *** bule2 has quit IRC
  43 2018-01-11T01:29:00  *** Randolf has quit IRC
  44 2018-01-11T01:29:19  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
  45 2018-01-11T01:37:51  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
  46 2018-01-11T01:38:04  *** Tennis has quit IRC
  47 2018-01-11T01:38:33  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  48 2018-01-11T01:45:29  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  49 2018-01-11T01:50:01  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  50 2018-01-11T01:59:13  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  51 2018-01-11T01:59:26  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  52 2018-01-11T02:01:11  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  53 2018-01-11T02:02:35  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
  54 2018-01-11T02:07:11  *** promag has quit IRC
  55 2018-01-11T02:07:29  *** bule2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  56 2018-01-11T02:11:52  *** bule has quit IRC
  57 2018-01-11T02:19:40  *** logicue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  58 2018-01-11T02:24:33  *** logicue has quit IRC
  59 2018-01-11T02:24:34  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  60 2018-01-11T02:24:44  *** jb55 has quit IRC
  61 2018-01-11T02:25:04  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  62 2018-01-11T02:39:22  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
  63 2018-01-11T02:39:32  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  64 2018-01-11T02:40:00  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  65 2018-01-11T02:41:41  *** flokie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  66 2018-01-11T02:42:33  *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
  67 2018-01-11T02:43:50  *** NicolasDorier has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  68 2018-01-11T02:44:20  *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  69 2018-01-11T02:44:24  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  70 2018-01-11T02:44:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] azuchi opened pull request #12143: [Doc] Fix link for BIP-159 pull request (master...fix-bip159-link) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12143
  71 2018-01-11T02:54:56  *** JackH_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  72 2018-01-11T02:58:33  *** JackH has quit IRC
  73 2018-01-11T03:02:32  *** bule2 has quit IRC
  74 2018-01-11T03:05:15  *** steadguy has quit IRC
  75 2018-01-11T03:06:06  *** steadguy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  76 2018-01-11T03:08:38  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  77 2018-01-11T03:12:48  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
  78 2018-01-11T03:14:00  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  79 2018-01-11T03:19:12  *** flokie has quit IRC
  80 2018-01-11T03:25:51  *** esotericnonsense has quit IRC
  81 2018-01-11T03:33:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
  82 2018-01-11T03:34:19  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  83 2018-01-11T03:36:42  *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  84 2018-01-11T03:37:45  *** tknp has quit IRC
  85 2018-01-11T03:38:32  *** belcher has quit IRC
  86 2018-01-11T03:39:21  *** Emcy has quit IRC
  87 2018-01-11T03:47:41  *** flokie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  88 2018-01-11T03:51:44  *** contrapumpkin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  89 2018-01-11T03:53:45  *** jb55 has quit IRC
  90 2018-01-11T03:56:43  *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  91 2018-01-11T04:08:34  *** arubi has quit IRC
  92 2018-01-11T04:08:53  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  93 2018-01-11T04:11:37  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  94 2018-01-11T04:16:38  *** JayBerg has quit IRC
  95 2018-01-11T04:21:45  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
  96 2018-01-11T04:21:54  *** contrapumpkin has quit IRC
  97 2018-01-11T04:27:47  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  98 2018-01-11T04:31:57  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  99 2018-01-11T04:51:33  *** Jbstone has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 100 2018-01-11T04:52:36  *** Jbstone has quit IRC
 101 2018-01-11T04:54:12  *** tknp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 102 2018-01-11T05:08:59  *** bule2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 103 2018-01-11T05:15:04  *** a5m0_ has quit IRC
 104 2018-01-11T05:20:25  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
 105 2018-01-11T05:20:38  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 106 2018-01-11T05:22:01  *** bule2 has quit IRC
 107 2018-01-11T05:23:02  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 108 2018-01-11T05:26:14  *** a5m0 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 109 2018-01-11T05:27:27  *** promag has quit IRC
 110 2018-01-11T05:31:19  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 111 2018-01-11T05:34:41  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 112 2018-01-11T05:45:02  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 113 2018-01-11T05:45:41  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 114 2018-01-11T05:57:39  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 115 2018-01-11T05:58:15  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
 116 2018-01-11T05:58:47  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 117 2018-01-11T05:58:54  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 118 2018-01-11T06:06:55  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 119 2018-01-11T06:10:52  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 120 2018-01-11T06:16:02  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 121 2018-01-11T06:16:25  *** flokie has quit IRC
 122 2018-01-11T06:20:30  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 123 2018-01-11T06:24:19  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 124 2018-01-11T06:27:26  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 125 2018-01-11T06:31:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/45173fa6fca9...b0d626d10f78
 126 2018-01-11T06:31:37  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 91769d6 azuchi: [Doc] Fix link for bip 159 pull request
 127 2018-01-11T06:31:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b0d626d Jonas Schnelli: Merge #12143: [Doc] Fix link for BIP-159 pull request...
 128 2018-01-11T06:32:08  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 129 2018-01-11T06:32:43  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #12143: [Doc] Fix link for BIP-159 pull request (master...fix-bip159-link) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12143
 130 2018-01-11T06:37:40  *** mrannanay has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 131 2018-01-11T06:43:42  *** maaku has quit IRC
 132 2018-01-11T06:46:17  *** maaku has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 133 2018-01-11T06:56:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 13 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b0d626d10f78...d889c036cd6f
 134 2018-01-11T06:56:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0c8ea63 Pieter Wuille: Abstract out IsSolvable from Witnessifier
 135 2018-01-11T06:56:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cbe1974 Pieter Wuille: [refactor] GetAccount{PubKey,Address} -> GetAccountDestination
 136 2018-01-11T06:56:09  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 985c795 Pieter Wuille: Improve witness destination types and use them more
 137 2018-01-11T06:56:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #11403: SegWit wallet support (master...201709_segwitwallet2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11403
 138 2018-01-11T06:57:22  <meshcollider> \o/ awesome
 139 2018-01-11T06:57:27  *** Chenpan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 140 2018-01-11T07:00:58  <achow101> \O/
 141 2018-01-11T07:01:14  <sturles> git pull
 142 2018-01-11T07:01:31  <achow101> well time to rebase everything
 143 2018-01-11T07:04:44  *** mgeuirx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 144 2018-01-11T07:07:05  *** tknp has quit IRC
 145 2018-01-11T07:09:13  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Restart your rebase engines please. :)
 146 2018-01-11T07:09:54  <jouke> \o/
 147 2018-01-11T07:09:54  *** mgeuirx has quit IRC
 148 2018-01-11T07:10:02  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 149 2018-01-11T07:11:32  <rabidus> :)
 150 2018-01-11T07:14:43  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 151 2018-01-11T07:15:22  *** jouke has quit IRC
 152 2018-01-11T07:15:22  *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 153 2018-01-11T07:15:44  *** tectonic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 154 2018-01-11T07:17:29  *** Amuza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 155 2018-01-11T07:23:39  <meshcollider> When does wumpus get back again?
 156 2018-01-11T07:49:45  *** steadguy has quit IRC
 157 2018-01-11T07:55:37  <jonasschnelli> meshcollider: I though this week. But maybe its next.
 158 2018-01-11T07:55:44  <jonasschnelli> thought
 159 2018-01-11T07:57:30  *** zautomata has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 160 2018-01-11T08:01:33  <provoostenator> Rebase party time! Congrats sipa on that merge.
 161 2018-01-11T08:04:09  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 162 2018-01-11T08:05:29  *** midnightmagic has quit IRC
 163 2018-01-11T08:08:27  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 164 2018-01-11T08:13:30  <jb55> will said party be... interactive?
 165 2018-01-11T08:15:47  * jb55 walks away slowly
 166 2018-01-11T08:18:56  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
 167 2018-01-11T08:19:25  <luke-jr> uh, not seeing the logic for wallet versioning there.. How do I configure my wallet to NOT upgrade?
 168 2018-01-11T08:19:35  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 169 2018-01-11T08:20:33  * provoostenator wonders if there is such a thing as VM rage after umpteen useless Windows 10 notifications 
 170 2018-01-11T08:20:52  <sipa> luke-jr: you mean due to bech32 addresses in your label map?
 171 2018-01-11T08:23:06  <luke-jr> well, I would have expected ImplicitlyLearnRelatedKeyScripts to be conditional on the wallet being an upgraded version
 172 2018-01-11T08:23:14  <luke-jr> I don't even see a flag for the wallet version bump
 173 2018-01-11T08:23:37  <sipa> luke-jr: that doesn't affect the wallet file
 174 2018-01-11T08:24:19  <sipa> you can downgrade down to any segwit capable version
 175 2018-01-11T08:24:50  <luke-jr> But how do I upgrade without accepting Segwit payments?
 176 2018-01-11T08:25:36  <sipa> ah, you can't
 177 2018-01-11T08:26:10  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: why would you want that? Can you elaborate the use case?
 178 2018-01-11T08:26:13  <luke-jr> when and why was that changed?
 179 2018-01-11T08:26:17  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: to prevent block size increases
 180 2018-01-11T08:26:24  <sipa> sigh
 181 2018-01-11T08:27:07  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: why would "not accepting" sw payment change that?
 182 2018-01-11T08:27:16  <jonasschnelli> (not talking about "not handing our SW addresses")
 183 2018-01-11T08:27:25  <jonasschnelli> *out
 184 2018-01-11T08:28:03  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: someone can take a normal address from this, and modify it to a Segwit one, and the user won't even know it?
 185 2018-01-11T08:28:35  <sipa> luke-jr: that's a problem, but it's inherent to the wallet design
 186 2018-01-11T08:28:47  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 187 2018-01-11T08:28:54  <jonasschnelli> I see
 188 2018-01-11T08:28:59  <sipa> they can also convert p2pkh  into p2pk etc
 189 2018-01-11T08:29:05  *** kabaum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 190 2018-01-11T08:29:46  <luke-jr> sipa: not without this change
 191 2018-01-11T08:29:53  <sipa> ?
 192 2018-01-11T08:30:06  <sipa> we have always accepted payments to p2pk
 193 2018-01-11T08:30:08  <luke-jr> without this change, it isn't possible to trick the user into accepting a segwit output
 194 2018-01-11T08:30:13  *** zautomata has quit IRC
 195 2018-01-11T08:30:53  *** Amuza has quit IRC
 196 2018-01-11T08:30:59  <sipa> yes, i don't see why that is any more of a problem than accepting p2pk instead of p2pkh (which grows the utxo set morez for example)
 197 2018-01-11T08:31:02  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 198 2018-01-11T08:31:15  <luke-jr> sipa: only segwit outputs enable block size increases
 199 2018-01-11T08:31:32  *** zautomata has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 200 2018-01-11T08:31:43  <sipa> i think utxo growth is a far worse problem
 201 2018-01-11T08:31:44  <luke-jr> also, without a wallet version bump, old wallets won't receive properly for segwit addresses generated by newer software, I think?
 202 2018-01-11T08:31:45  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: if you think this is an important feature (I don't), you may want to write a PR?
 203 2018-01-11T08:31:53  <sipa> luke-jr: they will
 204 2018-01-11T08:31:58  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 205 2018-01-11T08:32:03  <sipa> (down to 0.13.1)
 206 2018-01-11T08:32:20  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: okay, although this was what I expected already from the discussions months ago planning it
 207 2018-01-11T08:32:33  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 208 2018-01-11T08:32:49  <luke-jr> sipa: I thought the wallet didn't get the data added permanently?
 209 2018-01-11T08:32:53  <sipa> it does
 210 2018-01-11T08:33:00  <sipa> read the PR description
 211 2018-01-11T08:33:06  <luke-jr> did that change at some point?
 212 2018-01-11T08:33:26  <sipa> yes, and there is even a design doc to explain it
 213 2018-01-11T08:33:49  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: you didn't mentioned that point in 11403
 214 2018-01-11T08:34:07  <meshcollider> this one I think sipa is referring to https://gist.github.com/sipa/125cfa1615946d0c3f3eec2ad7f250a2
 215 2018-01-11T08:35:39  *** kabaum_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 216 2018-01-11T08:37:15  *** steadguy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 217 2018-01-11T08:37:42  *** Amuza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 218 2018-01-11T08:39:33  *** kabaum_ has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 219 2018-01-11T08:39:50  *** kabaum has quit IRC
 220 2018-01-11T08:40:17  *** kabaum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 221 2018-01-11T08:41:27  *** steadguy has quit IRC
 222 2018-01-11T08:42:24  *** tectonic has quit IRC
 223 2018-01-11T08:43:26  *** Amuza has quit IRC
 224 2018-01-11T08:44:48  <luke-jr> wouldn't the implicit in-memory redeemscript adding for old keys be sufficient if only applied to the keypool/new keys?
 225 2018-01-11T08:46:49  <sipa> read the design doc, it goes through all the scenarios it is intended to work in, and how they necessitate the implemented behaviour
 226 2018-01-11T08:46:52  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 227 2018-01-11T08:47:52  *** zautomata1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 228 2018-01-11T08:48:35  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 229 2018-01-11T08:49:32  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 230 2018-01-11T08:49:32  *** zautomata has quit IRC
 231 2018-01-11T08:50:35  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 232 2018-01-11T08:51:56  <luke-jr> sipa: I read it, but it's not clear to me why 1a requires it effect ALL keys, rather than just keypool (ie, unused at the time of the backup) and future
 233 2018-01-11T08:52:25  <luke-jr> labelled keys already have a non-segwit address assigned, and should never be seen in segwit form
 234 2018-01-11T08:53:37  <sipa> you can't know that you aren't using a restored backup which had a lost future in which the same key was used in a different address type
 235 2018-01-11T08:55:39  <luke-jr> hm, so 1) user backs up, 2) user makes a new address, 3) user restores backup, 4) user upgrades, 5) user makes a new segwit address overlapping the one in 2, 6) user downgrades, 7) user restores backup again
 236 2018-01-11T08:55:40  <luke-jr> ?
 237 2018-01-11T08:56:13  <sipa> the only way we can actually remove the ability to accept payment to a different address type than the one we know about is afaik by having separate keychains for each address type
 238 2018-01-11T08:56:51  <sipa> luke-jr: i don't think 6 and 7 are needed in that scenario
 239 2018-01-11T08:57:15  <sipa> and swap the segwit and legacy
 240 2018-01-11T08:57:17  <meshcollider> sipa: they are needed because the first address was legacy and the second was segwit i believe
 241 2018-01-11T08:57:18  <meshcollider> yeah
 242 2018-01-11T08:58:15  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 243 2018-01-11T08:58:26  <luke-jr> sipa: I don't understand.. step 2 can't make a segwit address since it's pre-upgrade
 244 2018-01-11T08:58:56  <sipa> someone first creates a backup, then creates a segwit address, then restores the backup, creates a legacy address with the same key, restarts
 245 2018-01-11T08:58:57  *** zautomata1 has quit IRC
 246 2018-01-11T08:59:00  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 247 2018-01-11T08:59:02  <sipa> no old versions involved even
 248 2018-01-11T08:59:34  <luke-jr> upon restoring the backup, that key would be in the keypool, so it would get the implied script
 249 2018-01-11T08:59:36  <sipa> the result is a file with no explicit segwit script, and a label for a legacy address for a certain key
 250 2018-01-11T09:00:09  <luke-jr> oh, add a restart and the implicit script disappears!
 251 2018-01-11T09:00:15  <meshcollider> yeah the legacy address has to be created on the old version so it doesnt hit the implicit addition of segwit scripts
 252 2018-01-11T09:00:18  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 253 2018-01-11T09:00:21  <meshcollider> oh
 254 2018-01-11T09:00:27  <sipa> no it doesn't
 255 2018-01-11T09:00:41  <meshcollider> yeah I got it now, right
 256 2018-01-11T09:00:53  <luke-jr> I thought I got it until "no it doesn't" :x
 257 2018-01-11T09:01:12  <luke-jr> unless that was a reply to meshcollider
 258 2018-01-11T09:01:16  <sipa> the "no it doesn't" is a response to meshcollider saying it needs an old version
 259 2018-01-11T09:01:19  <meshcollider> yeah that was a reply to me
 260 2018-01-11T09:01:21  <luke-jr> ah ok
 261 2018-01-11T09:01:38  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 262 2018-01-11T09:02:01  <sipa> i'm not sure this scenario is actually covered in thendocument though
 263 2018-01-11T09:02:38  <meshcollider> sipa: it is, just not so explicitly written out
 264 2018-01-11T09:02:57  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 265 2018-01-11T09:03:07  <sipa> may be worth spelling kt out
 266 2018-01-11T09:03:10  <sipa> *it
 267 2018-01-11T09:03:11  <meshcollider> it just stops at restoring the backup, it doesn't mention creating a new legacy address and restarting
 268 2018-01-11T09:03:13  <meshcollider> yeah
 269 2018-01-11T09:05:17  *** anome has quit IRC
 270 2018-01-11T09:07:57  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
 271 2018-01-11T09:08:12  <provoostenator> The step 1-7 scenario luke-jr describes above is somethign I'd like to try on top of #12134
 272 2018-01-11T09:08:14  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12134 | [WIP] Build previous releases and run functional tests by Sjors · Pull Request #12134 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 273 2018-01-11T09:11:30  <meshcollider> provoostenator: I've only looked briefly at that but won't adding cross version testing to travis be too slow
 274 2018-01-11T09:12:07  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 275 2018-01-11T09:12:22  <provoostenator> meshcollider: the releases are cached, so it's a one-off 30 minute thing (and only for one machine).
 276 2018-01-11T09:12:53  <meshcollider> provoostenator: oh ok, that's all good then :)
 277 2018-01-11T09:16:28  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 278 2018-01-11T09:17:03  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 279 2018-01-11T09:18:12  <luke-jr> sipa: PM
 280 2018-01-11T09:23:32  *** tectonic_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 281 2018-01-11T09:28:31  <meshcollider> Does collaborators only mean members of the organization with write access to the repo? I'd previously assumed we'd be able to comment on PRs/issues even if they were locked because we were members but that doesn't appear to be the case
 282 2018-01-11T09:31:21  *** JackH_ has quit IRC
 283 2018-01-11T09:32:36  *** zautomata1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 284 2018-01-11T09:34:24  *** dcousens has quit IRC
 285 2018-01-11T09:34:50  *** tectonic_ has quit IRC
 286 2018-01-11T09:34:55  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 287 2018-01-11T09:37:37  *** zautomata1 has quit IRC
 288 2018-01-11T09:38:15  *** midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 289 2018-01-11T09:38:54  *** zautomata1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 290 2018-01-11T09:39:14  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 291 2018-01-11T09:41:17  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 292 2018-01-11T09:47:00  *** logicue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 293 2018-01-11T09:48:09  *** logicue has quit IRC
 294 2018-01-11T09:53:02  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 295 2018-01-11T09:55:03  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 296 2018-01-11T09:56:19  *** tectonic_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 297 2018-01-11T10:00:56  *** Xexe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 298 2018-01-11T10:02:51  *** zautomata1 has quit IRC
 299 2018-01-11T10:04:51  *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 300 2018-01-11T10:05:45  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 301 2018-01-11T10:10:51  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 302 2018-01-11T10:12:02  *** tectonic_ has quit IRC
 303 2018-01-11T10:13:16  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 304 2018-01-11T10:13:59  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 305 2018-01-11T10:17:03  *** tectonic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 306 2018-01-11T10:23:10  <provoostenator> Travis is in a bad mood today?
 307 2018-01-11T10:24:11  <zelest> must be Ultron
 308 2018-01-11T10:26:18  <meshcollider> provoostenator: are you referring to 11991? I restarted it for you
 309 2018-01-11T10:26:33  <meshcollider> sipa: if you're online maybe you could add Sjors to the org so he can restart travis too
 310 2018-01-11T10:30:15  <sipa> i'm just on my phone now, will do later
 311 2018-01-11T10:30:55  <provoostenator> meshcollider: 11991 and 12119
 312 2018-01-11T10:31:44  <meshcollider> provoostenator: 12119 failed 4 checks, are you sure that its travis fault not something wrong with your PR?
 313 2018-01-11T10:32:32  <provoostenator> I'm not ruling that out, but the errors seemed to be timeouts.
 314 2018-01-11T10:33:07  <meshcollider> ok we'll try it again and see :)
 315 2018-01-11T10:33:19  <provoostenator> I'll also run the full suite locally
 316 2018-01-11T10:39:08  *** Amuza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 317 2018-01-11T10:49:02  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #12146: Wallet: Support disabling implicit Segwit operation (master...opt_wallet_segwit) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12146
 318 2018-01-11T10:54:00  <meshcollider> provoostenator: seems they're all failing again, so yeah must be something to do with the PR not travis
 319 2018-01-11T10:56:05  *** molz has quit IRC
 320 2018-01-11T10:56:26  *** arbitrary_guy has quit IRC
 321 2018-01-11T10:58:53  *** mlz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 322 2018-01-11T10:59:22  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 323 2018-01-11T11:01:02  *** rzhang__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 324 2018-01-11T11:08:04  *** lejitz has quit IRC
 325 2018-01-11T11:13:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] anvilcoin opened pull request #12148: Update README.md (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12148
 326 2018-01-11T11:14:06  <sturles> vi +
 327 2018-01-11T11:14:14  <sturles> Sorry..
 328 2018-01-11T11:15:42  <meshcollider> what do these people hope to achieve with PRs like that, do they honestly ever think it will get merged?
 329 2018-01-11T11:15:51  *** eck has quit IRC
 330 2018-01-11T11:16:58  <sipa> meshcollider: i believe they don't understand what 'pull' means in this context
 331 2018-01-11T11:18:21  <sipa> i believe many of them are just trying to make a clone or try making a simple change in their own cooy
 332 2018-01-11T11:18:35  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 333 2018-01-11T11:18:47  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 334 2018-01-11T11:20:21  <provoostenator> meshcollider: probably, but they both pass on my machine. 11991 fails with "/wallet/db.h:21:20: fatal error: db_cxx.h: No such file or directory" on one machine. I can try on a linux VM...
 335 2018-01-11T11:21:46  *** eck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 336 2018-01-11T11:22:04  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #12148: Update README.md (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12148
 337 2018-01-11T11:25:31  *** eck has quit IRC
 338 2018-01-11T11:25:45  *** eck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 339 2018-01-11T11:25:45  *** eck has quit IRC
 340 2018-01-11T11:27:04  *** eck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 341 2018-01-11T11:36:15  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 342 2018-01-11T11:51:44  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kashyap2690 opened pull request #12149: Unlock Wallet Implemented. (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12149
 343 2018-01-11T12:00:58  <wumpus> congrats on merging segwit wallet support jonasschnelli
 344 2018-01-11T12:01:59  *** sugarpuff has quit IRC
 345 2018-01-11T12:02:35  *** sugarpuff has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 346 2018-01-11T12:04:57  <wumpus> and sipa and everyone that reviewed ofcourse
 347 2018-01-11T12:07:16  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 348 2018-01-11T12:09:13  <provoostenator> luke-jr from the title and description of 12146 it's not immediatley clear what you're tying to do, but I'll study it later. If you mention the "-walletimplicitsegwit" flag explictly in the description, it's probably a bit more clear.
 349 2018-01-11T12:10:13  <provoostenator> It would also help to clarify how it's different from -addresstype=legacy, other than foot-shooting protection.
 350 2018-01-11T12:11:45  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 351 2018-01-11T12:12:27  <provoostenator> I assume we'll chat during todays meeting about what the earliest possible release date is, so people know how much time is left to get more stuff in?
 352 2018-01-11T12:13:10  <provoostenator> (particularly stuff related to SegWit)
 353 2018-01-11T12:13:42  <provoostenator> I'd say at least two weeks given some of the current discussion.
 354 2018-01-11T12:16:46  <wumpus> yes we should give some time for fixes after this merge and before the release
 355 2018-01-11T12:18:22  *** Amuza has quit IRC
 356 2018-01-11T12:18:30  <promag> there are some things to do
 357 2018-01-11T12:18:37  <provoostenator> Is there something we changed since v0.15.1 that causes newly created wallets to be incompatible with v0.15.1? If so, what compile / launch flag do I need to use for v0.15.1?
 358 2018-01-11T12:18:46  <promag> maybe sipa is working on those follow ups?
 359 2018-01-11T12:19:42  <provoostenator> (if not, then I'm during something wrong in my regtest setup, quite possible)
 360 2018-01-11T12:21:08  <wumpus> probably the segwit change caused newly created wallets to be incompatible with 0.15.x?
 361 2018-01-11T12:21:08  *** arubi has quit IRC
 362 2018-01-11T12:23:04  *** ossifrage has quit IRC
 363 2018-01-11T12:23:23  *** ossifrage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 364 2018-01-11T12:24:37  *** mariorz has quit IRC
 365 2018-01-11T12:24:58  *** mariorz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 366 2018-01-11T12:25:59  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 367 2018-01-11T12:26:05  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
 368 2018-01-11T12:26:23  *** maxim89 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 369 2018-01-11T12:26:25  <sipa> provoostenator: what fails? it should work fine as long as you don't create bech32 addresses
 370 2018-01-11T12:26:39  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 371 2018-01-11T12:27:03  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 372 2018-01-11T12:27:04  <sipa> provoostenator: oh, or the default key thing?
 373 2018-01-11T12:27:13  *** AndyS2 has quit IRC
 374 2018-01-11T12:27:26  <provoostenator> After I copy the wallet over to a 0.15 node and restart, it throws "Error loading wallet.dat: Wallet requires newer version of Bitcoin Core". I only added a legacy address.
 375 2018-01-11T12:27:42  *** AndyS2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 376 2018-01-11T12:27:52  <provoostenator> default key thing?
 377 2018-01-11T12:28:28  <sipa> yes, i don't think you can use 0.16 wallets in 0.15
 378 2018-01-11T12:28:41  <sipa> but you can create a 0.15 wallet, use it 0.16, and then downgrade
 379 2018-01-11T12:29:14  <provoostenator> Ok, I'll use that approach in my backwards compatilibity test. It's more future proof anyway.
 380 2018-01-11T12:30:45  *** maxim89 has quit IRC
 381 2018-01-11T12:31:34  <wumpus> yes, that's the way to go
 382 2018-01-11T12:31:52  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 383 2018-01-11T12:32:04  <provoostenator> Anything around --with-incompatible-bdb that's worth testing?
 384 2018-01-11T12:37:00  *** hirishaway is now known as hirish
 385 2018-01-11T12:38:00  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
 386 2018-01-11T12:45:30  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 387 2018-01-11T12:46:02  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 388 2018-01-11T12:46:51  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 389 2018-01-11T12:47:24  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 390 2018-01-11T13:01:47  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
 391 2018-01-11T13:02:00  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 392 2018-01-11T13:07:12  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #12150: Fix ListCoins test failure due to unset g_address_type, g_change_type (master...pr/listg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12150
 393 2018-01-11T13:12:20  *** Chenpan has quit IRC
 394 2018-01-11T13:16:49  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d889c036cd6f...3c6286873e50
 395 2018-01-11T13:16:49  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2be2b5d Jacky C: Remove the ending slashes from RPC URI format.
 396 2018-01-11T13:16:50  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3c62868 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12112: Docs: Remove the ending slashes from RPC URI format....
 397 2018-01-11T13:17:32  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12112: Docs: Remove the ending slashes from RPC URI format. (master...docs/multi-wallet_RPC_interface_correction) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12112
 398 2018-01-11T13:19:03  *** Chenpan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 399 2018-01-11T13:19:19  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #12151: Remove cs_main lock from blockToJSON and blockheaderToJSON (master...2018-01-blocktojson) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12151
 400 2018-01-11T13:23:19  *** indistylo has quit IRC
 401 2018-01-11T13:25:18  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 402 2018-01-11T13:26:45  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 403 2018-01-11T13:35:45  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 404 2018-01-11T13:40:32  *** will_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 405 2018-01-11T13:41:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3c6286873e50...92a810d04b90
 406 2018-01-11T13:41:14  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f765bb3 Russell Yanofsky: Fix ListCoins test failure due to unset g_address_type, g_change_type...
 407 2018-01-11T13:41:14  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 92a810d MarcoFalke: Merge #12150: Fix ListCoins test failure due to unset g_address_type, g_change_type...
 408 2018-01-11T13:41:45  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 409 2018-01-11T13:41:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12150: Fix ListCoins test failure due to unset g_address_type, g_change_type (master...pr/listg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12150
 410 2018-01-11T13:46:56  *** promag has quit IRC
 411 2018-01-11T13:47:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/92a810d04b90...1d2eaba300bc
 412 2018-01-11T13:47:59  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 35c2b1f Suhas Daftuar: Fix rare failure in p2p-segwit.py...
 413 2018-01-11T13:48:00  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1d2eaba Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12133: [qa] Fix rare failure in p2p-segwit.py...
 414 2018-01-11T13:48:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12133: [qa] Fix rare failure in p2p-segwit.py (master...2018-01-fix-p2p-segwit) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12133
 415 2018-01-11T13:50:53  *** Xexe has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 416 2018-01-11T14:01:07  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 417 2018-01-11T14:01:23  *** eck has quit IRC
 418 2018-01-11T14:02:51  *** voidmain13 has quit IRC
 419 2018-01-11T14:07:25  <provoostenator> sipa: what's the expected failure mode of downgrading a wallet with a bech32 address? Is it supposed to be fully recoverable when you upgrade?
 420 2018-01-11T14:08:11  <sipa> provoostenator: the failure mode is that RPCs may report weird addresses
 421 2018-01-11T14:08:22  <provoostenator> Ok, that's what I'm seeing...
 422 2018-01-11T14:08:36  <sipa> in particular one very short address that starts with a 3
 423 2018-01-11T14:08:44  <provoostenator> I'll just bake that into the test, although a more severe warning would be nice, at least after upgrade.
 424 2018-01-11T14:08:53  <sipa> it should be fixed by uograding again
 425 2018-01-11T14:09:08  <provoostenator> Nope, weird address sticks for me. But I'm trying that again now.
 426 2018-01-11T14:09:35  <provoostenator> Actually nvm, my bad.
 427 2018-01-11T14:09:44  *** Arielle33Wilkins has quit IRC
 428 2018-01-11T14:15:47  *** JayBerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 429 2018-01-11T14:19:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #12152: [WIP] misc. backwards compatibility tests (master...previous-release-segwit-wallet-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12152
 430 2018-01-11T14:19:57  <provoostenator> It does recover. Any other scenarios I should add ^ ?
 431 2018-01-11T14:24:15  <sipa> provoostenator: have you seen my gist on segwit wallet?
 432 2018-01-11T14:24:29  <sipa> it explicitly lists a number of scenarios that are intended to work
 433 2018-01-11T14:24:58  <provoostenator> I read it in early December. It is still up to date? Back then it had several atlernative plans.
 434 2018-01-11T14:25:47  <provoostenator> So it's 1a and 3a now?
 435 2018-01-11T14:25:48  <sipa> yes, it is up to date
 436 2018-01-11T14:25:51  <sipa> and 5
 437 2018-01-11T14:26:09  <sipa> but the solutions don't matter for you, just the supported scenarios :)
 438 2018-01-11T14:26:32  <provoostenator> Ah yes, alright I'll see if can turn those into tests.
 439 2018-01-11T14:26:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #12153: Avoid permanent cs_main lock in getblockheader (master...2018-01-getblockheader) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12153
 440 2018-01-11T14:32:55  <provoostenator> sipa: might be a good idea to move that gist to the docs repo or some other easier to find spot? At least the current-facts part of it.
 441 2018-01-11T14:33:56  <sipa> provoostenator: perhaps, though such documents may get outfated soon
 442 2018-01-11T14:33:58  <sipa> *outdated
 443 2018-01-11T14:34:35  *** wtabata has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 444 2018-01-11T14:35:09  *** Swifree has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 445 2018-01-11T14:35:42  <provoostenator> In case of the wallet format, any proposed change should reference that document and we could consider a PR unfinished until a corresponding doc change PR is there. Hopefully eventually the wallet will be intuitive enough that the doc can be removed.
 446 2018-01-11T14:35:47  *** will_ has quit IRC
 447 2018-01-11T14:36:38  *** belcher_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 448 2018-01-11T14:38:46  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 449 2018-01-11T14:39:39  *** Swifree has quit IRC
 450 2018-01-11T14:40:42  *** wtabata has quit IRC
 451 2018-01-11T14:41:02  *** wtabata has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 452 2018-01-11T14:43:07  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 453 2018-01-11T14:56:01  *** dcousens has quit IRC
 454 2018-01-11T14:56:16  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 455 2018-01-11T14:59:31  *** hirish is now known as hirishaway
 456 2018-01-11T15:00:35  *** Lauda has quit IRC
 457 2018-01-11T15:01:14  *** Lauda has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 458 2018-01-11T15:02:37  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 459 2018-01-11T15:02:37  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 460 2018-01-11T15:06:23  *** hirishaway is now known as hirish
 461 2018-01-11T15:07:26  *** wtabata is now known as wtabat
 462 2018-01-11T15:07:30  *** wtabat is now known as wtabata
 463 2018-01-11T15:13:14  *** Judah16Tillman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 464 2018-01-11T15:16:58  *** anome has quit IRC
 465 2018-01-11T15:19:48  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
 466 2018-01-11T15:20:25  <promag> GH down?
 467 2018-01-11T15:21:59  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 468 2018-01-11T15:24:02  *** hirish is now known as hirishaway
 469 2018-01-11T15:24:44  <instagibbs> promag, yes
 470 2018-01-11T15:24:51  *** hirishaway is now known as hirish
 471 2018-01-11T15:25:13  *** contrapumpkin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 472 2018-01-11T15:26:57  *** whphhg has quit IRC
 473 2018-01-11T15:27:25  *** wxss has quit IRC
 474 2018-01-11T15:28:35  *** Chenpan has quit IRC
 475 2018-01-11T15:30:19  *** arubi has quit IRC
 476 2018-01-11T15:31:13  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 477 2018-01-11T15:32:32  *** JackH has quit IRC
 478 2018-01-11T15:33:38  *** whphhg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 479 2018-01-11T15:33:39  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 480 2018-01-11T15:44:49  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 481 2018-01-11T15:45:36  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 482 2018-01-11T15:50:38  *** mrsc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 483 2018-01-11T15:53:03  *** mrsc has quit IRC
 484 2018-01-11T15:56:38  *** Chenpan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 485 2018-01-11T15:57:44  *** eck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 486 2018-01-11T15:57:56  *** unholymachine has quit IRC
 487 2018-01-11T15:58:34  *** unholymachine has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 488 2018-01-11T16:00:09  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 489 2018-01-11T16:01:22  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 490 2018-01-11T16:02:50  *** eck has quit IRC
 491 2018-01-11T16:03:32  *** eck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 492 2018-01-11T16:04:49  *** Chenpan has quit IRC
 493 2018-01-11T16:05:20  *** Chenpan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 494 2018-01-11T16:09:59  *** contrapumpkin has quit IRC
 495 2018-01-11T16:27:24  *** contrapumpkin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 496 2018-01-11T16:43:33  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 497 2018-01-11T16:43:34  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 498 2018-01-11T16:53:37  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 499 2018-01-11T16:54:42  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 500 2018-01-11T17:01:02  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 501 2018-01-11T17:01:13  *** JayBerg has quit IRC
 502 2018-01-11T17:02:22  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 503 2018-01-11T17:05:58  *** promag has quit IRC
 504 2018-01-11T17:25:52  *** JayBerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 505 2018-01-11T17:27:55  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 506 2018-01-11T17:28:09  *** JayBerg has quit IRC
 507 2018-01-11T17:29:02  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 508 2018-01-11T17:29:12  *** JayBerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 509 2018-01-11T17:32:46  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 510 2018-01-11T17:33:35  *** JayBerg has quit IRC
 511 2018-01-11T17:34:48  *** Ephraim has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 512 2018-01-11T17:35:45  <Ephraim> help
 513 2018-01-11T17:38:23  *** timothy has quit IRC
 514 2018-01-11T17:38:35  *** belcher_ has quit IRC
 515 2018-01-11T17:38:46  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 516 2018-01-11T17:38:52  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 517 2018-01-11T17:38:53  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
 518 2018-01-11T17:39:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1d2eaba300bc...0910cbe4ef31
 519 2018-01-11T17:39:23  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 18be3ab Chris Stewart: Adding test case for SINGLE|ANYONECANPAY hash type in tx_valid.json
 520 2018-01-11T17:39:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0910cbe MarcoFalke: Merge #12082: Adding test case for SINGLE|ANYONECANPAY hash type in tx_valid.json...
 521 2018-01-11T17:39:28  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 522 2018-01-11T17:40:03  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12082: Adding test case for SINGLE|ANYONECANPAY hash type in tx_valid.json (master...add_tx_valid_singleanyonecanpay) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12082
 523 2018-01-11T17:40:29  *** Ephraim has quit IRC
 524 2018-01-11T17:47:05  *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 525 2018-01-11T17:49:11  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 526 2018-01-11T17:51:04  *** anome has quit IRC
 527 2018-01-11T17:51:35  *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
 528 2018-01-11T17:52:59  *** Murch has quit IRC
 529 2018-01-11T17:53:37  <achow101> what's wrong with travis today?
 530 2018-01-11T17:54:16  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 531 2018-01-11T17:54:52  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532 2018-01-11T17:55:38  <wumpus> what is it doing?
 533 2018-01-11T17:56:04  *** rebel84 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 534 2018-01-11T17:57:00  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 535 2018-01-11T17:58:50  *** indistylo has quit IRC
 536 2018-01-11T17:59:14  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 537 2018-01-11T17:59:49  *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 538 2018-01-11T18:00:20  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 539 2018-01-11T18:03:15  *** rebel84 has quit IRC
 540 2018-01-11T18:07:46  *** JayBerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 541 2018-01-11T18:12:24  *** JayBerg has quit IRC
 542 2018-01-11T18:14:09  <achow101> nvm. I was just confused as to how 8 of the most recent PRs were failing travis. thought it was a problem travis but its actually a problem with those 8 PRs :/
 543 2018-01-11T18:16:05  *** indistylo has quit IRC
 544 2018-01-11T18:16:25  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 545 2018-01-11T18:16:41  *** isis has quit IRC
 546 2018-01-11T18:17:36  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 547 2018-01-11T18:20:17  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 548 2018-01-11T18:28:52  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 549 2018-01-11T18:29:30  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 550 2018-01-11T18:31:47  *** m8tion has quit IRC
 551 2018-01-11T18:32:25  *** m8tion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 552 2018-01-11T18:33:37  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 553 2018-01-11T18:33:51  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 554 2018-01-11T18:34:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 555 2018-01-11T18:36:24  <wumpus> indeed, master is passing according to my mails
 556 2018-01-11T18:37:32  *** anome has quit IRC
 557 2018-01-11T18:38:12  *** wraithm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 558 2018-01-11T18:39:53  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 559 2018-01-11T18:41:55  *** anome has quit IRC
 560 2018-01-11T18:43:31  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 561 2018-01-11T18:44:23  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 562 2018-01-11T18:46:41  *** m8tion has quit IRC
 563 2018-01-11T18:48:28  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 564 2018-01-11T18:52:17  *** anome has quit IRC
 565 2018-01-11T18:53:31  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 566 2018-01-11T18:57:15  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 567 2018-01-11T18:57:30  *** clarkmoody has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 568 2018-01-11T18:59:41  <wumpus> meeting?
 569 2018-01-11T18:59:44  <jtimon> hi
 570 2018-01-11T18:59:50  <jonasschnelli> yes
 571 2018-01-11T19:00:15  <wumpus> #startmeeting
 572 2018-01-11T19:00:15  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Jan 11 19:00:15 2018 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
 573 2018-01-11T19:00:15  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
 574 2018-01-11T19:00:21  <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag
 575 2018-01-11T19:00:38  <meshcollider> hi
 576 2018-01-11T19:00:40  <wumpus> congrats everyone on merging segwit wallet!
 577 2018-01-11T19:00:47  <meshcollider> \o/
 578 2018-01-11T19:00:48  <achow101> hi
 579 2018-01-11T19:01:04  <wumpus> I think we should focus this meeting on what there is to do still for 0.16
 580 2018-01-11T19:01:21  <provoostenator> hi
 581 2018-01-11T19:01:22  <wumpus> I've just updated https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/30 removing everything that isn't either a bugfix or has to do with segwit
 582 2018-01-11T19:01:25  <instagibbs> hi
 583 2018-01-11T19:01:31  <instagibbs> \o/ so great to see
 584 2018-01-11T19:01:32  <wumpus> (well, moving it forward to 0.17)
 585 2018-01-11T19:02:18  <provoostenator> I'd like to get either #11991 or #11937 in so non-tech-savy people can actually use bech32.
 586 2018-01-11T19:02:21  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11991 | [qt] Receive: checkbox for bech32 address by Sjors · Pull Request #11991 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 587 2018-01-11T19:02:23  <wumpus> so that is the "high priority" list for now, if there's anything that should be added let me know
 588 2018-01-11T19:02:23  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11937 | Qt: Setting for deciding address type (legacy, p2sh or bech32) by hsjoberg · Pull Request #11937 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 589 2018-01-11T19:02:27  <BlueMatt> #11281 needs rebase and resolution of current discussion
 590 2018-01-11T19:02:31  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11281 | Avoid permanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #11281 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 591 2018-01-11T19:02:40  <jonasschnelli> Will do soon
 592 2018-01-11T19:02:46  <wumpus> provoostenator: agreed
 593 2018-01-11T19:02:59  <provoostenator> I'll try to keep them fresh based on feedback.
 594 2018-01-11T19:03:05  <instagibbs> -qt support for address types i think is a big ? still
 595 2018-01-11T19:03:08  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I also think 11991 11937 should go into 0.16
 596 2018-01-11T19:03:09  *** Chris_St1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 597 2018-01-11T19:03:13  <BlueMatt> I believe there's still pending segwit wallet stuff in some rpcs that are still TODO
 598 2018-01-11T19:03:14  <BlueMatt> sipa?
 599 2018-01-11T19:03:15  <achow101> If 11281 goes in, I would like to also have #11200
 600 2018-01-11T19:03:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11200 | Allow for aborting rescans and canceling showProgress dialogs by achow101 · Pull Request #11200 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 601 2018-01-11T19:03:35  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 602 2018-01-11T19:03:36  <cfields> hi, here
 603 2018-01-11T19:04:05  <achow101> also #12101 and #12104 are bugfix-ish
 604 2018-01-11T19:04:06  <provoostenator> bech32 change behavior is nice to have; #11991 is mostly for my own OCD and I can just run that myself
 605 2018-01-11T19:04:07  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12101 | Clamp walletpassphrase timeout to 2^31 seconds and check its bounds by achow101 · Pull Request #12101 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 606 2018-01-11T19:04:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12104 | HTTP Error 404: Not Found
 607 2018-01-11T19:04:09  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11991 | [qt] Receive: checkbox for bech32 address by Sjors · Pull Request #11991 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 608 2018-01-11T19:04:32  <achow101> s/12024/12104
 609 2018-01-11T19:04:33  <BlueMatt> do we want to fix the non-regression rpc too-many-sockets thing given its an upstream bug? cfields?
 610 2018-01-11T19:04:37  <provoostenator> (sorry, I meant #12119)
 611 2018-01-11T19:04:39  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12119 | [wallet] use bech32 change address if any destination is bech32 by Sjors · Pull Request #12119 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 612 2018-01-11T19:04:43  *** Murch has quit IRC
 613 2018-01-11T19:04:49  *** JayBerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 614 2018-01-11T19:05:06  <cfields> BlueMatt: yes, I'll clean that up and PR it today. What's not clear, though, is if we should attempt to max out available fds.
 615 2018-01-11T19:05:08  <wumpus> 11200 seems more like a feature and isn't necessarily segwit related
 616 2018-01-11T19:05:25  <wumpus> more for 0.17
 617 2018-01-11T19:05:44  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 618 2018-01-11T19:06:20  <provoostenator> wumpus: when you move something to 0.17 does that mean it be merged before 0.16 is branched off, or does it not have that meaning?
 619 2018-01-11T19:06:30  <provoostenator> *it won't
 620 2018-01-11T19:06:45  <wumpus> provoostenator: yes
 621 2018-01-11T19:06:57  *** Judah16Tillman has quit IRC
 622 2018-01-11T19:07:28  <BlueMatt> wumpus: tend to agree re: 11200, though I'd still very much like to see #11281
 623 2018-01-11T19:07:31  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11281 | Avoid permanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #11281 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 624 2018-01-11T19:07:34  <meshcollider> Will we have the signing certificates ready for the release? jonasschnelli cfields
 625 2018-01-11T19:07:49  <cfields> wumpus: consider the maxing fd's question a topic suggestion. I'm unsure what to do there.
 626 2018-01-11T19:07:58  <wumpus> BlueMatt: isn't that one already on there?
 627 2018-01-11T19:08:16  <jonasschnelli> meshcollider: at least there is a static non distributed RSA cert now available... (OSX).
 628 2018-01-11T19:08:32  <BlueMatt> wumpus: it is, was just re-enforcing :)
 629 2018-01-11T19:08:35  <meshcollider> jonasschnelli: ok
 630 2018-01-11T19:08:47  <jonasschnelli> (but no clue about Windows) topic?
 631 2018-01-11T19:08:52  <cfields> meshcollider: yes, we didn't get the threshold key setup in time, so we have a temporary key now. Presumably for 0.16 only.
 632 2018-01-11T19:09:17  <wumpus> BlueMatt: but yes I agree keeping that, it's more of a fix I guess (but also not really)
 633 2018-01-11T19:09:22  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 634 2018-01-11T19:09:38  <promag> o/
 635 2018-01-11T19:10:08  <cfields> meshcollider: I've written up a few little things worth committing, I'll PR those today as well.
 636 2018-01-11T19:10:09  <wumpus> great news regarding the signing key
 637 2018-01-11T19:10:15  <wumpus> cfields: ok, topic noted
 638 2018-01-11T19:11:22  <cfields> oh, on to me then?
 639 2018-01-11T19:11:45  <cfields> #11785 is what I'm unsure about
 640 2018-01-11T19:11:45  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 641 2018-01-11T19:11:46  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11785 | Raise the open fd limit to the maximum allowed by vii · Pull Request #11785 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 642 2018-01-11T19:11:48  <wumpus> #topic maxing out fds
 643 2018-01-11T19:12:15  <wumpus> oops, accidentelly tagged #12101 0.17 while it should be 0.16
 644 2018-01-11T19:12:16  <provoostenator> As discussed earlier today: what's the minimum time before we branch of 0.16? So there's some time to test stuff and fix PR's.
 645 2018-01-11T19:12:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12101 | Clamp walletpassphrase timeout to 2^31 seconds and check its bounds by achow101 · Pull Request #12101 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 646 2018-01-11T19:12:27  <cfields> tl;dr: there was an issue where fd's could be maxed out causing crashes and weird behavior. Let's assume that we get that issue under control. Should we still attempt to bump up our fd limit?
 647 2018-01-11T19:12:46  *** Murch has quit IRC
 648 2018-01-11T19:13:12  <wumpus> cfields: I'm not sure that should be default behavior, how much is it frowned upon if daemons do that, don't know how other software handles it?
 649 2018-01-11T19:13:33  <wumpus> cfields: I think the usual way is to leave ulimit setting to the user/sysadmin
 650 2018-01-11T19:13:49  <ryanofsky> provoostenator, i think normally there is a feature freeze on master before creating the release branch
 651 2018-01-11T19:14:16  <wumpus> yes, normally there's a feature freeze
 652 2018-01-11T19:14:34  <wumpus> I also need to open translations for 0.16
 653 2018-01-11T19:14:35  <cfields> wumpus: I tend to agree with that. IMO if we're bumping into fd issues, we want to see them rather than mask them
 654 2018-01-11T19:14:58  <cfields> but iirc gmaxwell was generally in favor of a general bump
 655 2018-01-11T19:15:02  <wumpus> cfields: indeed, we should try to be robust against them, or at least exit with a clear error if that it's not possible
 656 2018-01-11T19:15:22  *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 657 2018-01-11T19:15:33  <cfields> wumpus: ok, mind commenting there? I'll poke gmaxwell again about it too
 658 2018-01-11T19:15:45  <cfields> </topic>
 659 2018-01-11T19:15:51  <wumpus> cfields: sure
 660 2018-01-11T19:15:59  <cfields> thanks :)
 661 2018-01-11T19:16:01  <wumpus> other topics?
 662 2018-01-11T19:16:04  <jonasschnelli> I have a short disussion request for 11281
 663 2018-01-11T19:16:07  <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11281/commits/b2cc7020956cfd36925e4957493cd28d1d6f672e
 664 2018-01-11T19:16:16  <jonasschnelli> Is that a concern (see commit above)=
 665 2018-01-11T19:16:17  <jonasschnelli> ?
 666 2018-01-11T19:16:35  <jtimon> wumpus what are these "fds" to max out?
 667 2018-01-11T19:16:40  <wumpus> #topic "Avoid permanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime" discussion (jonasschnelli)
 668 2018-01-11T19:16:44  <jonasschnelli> sipa brought up the point, but I think it's okay if we just mention that in the rpc help
 669 2018-01-11T19:16:45  <wumpus> jtimon: "file descriptors"
 670 2018-01-11T19:16:49  <jtimon> thanks
 671 2018-01-11T19:17:23  <jonasschnelli> background: you may import a key and can see it's there but the related transactions are (still) missing
 672 2018-01-11T19:17:33  <achow101> I think it's fine to mention that in the help
 673 2018-01-11T19:17:34  <jonasschnelli> since the lock is released now
 674 2018-01-11T19:17:41  * BlueMatt is fine with the documentation fix, we cant always block the world waiting on things to be consistent
 675 2018-01-11T19:17:52  <BlueMatt> but sipa is the one who brought it up and apparently is mia today
 676 2018-01-11T19:18:05  <jonasschnelli> Okay. Lets wait on his feedback
 677 2018-01-11T19:18:08  <achow101> the alternative would be to block those calls during a rescan, right?
 678 2018-01-11T19:18:09  <jonasschnelli> </topic>
 679 2018-01-11T19:18:17  <wumpus> other topics?
 680 2018-01-11T19:18:20  <promag> what happens today if you import and then it crashes?
 681 2018-01-11T19:18:24  <jnewbery> Other PRs that would be nice for 0.16 are the RPC changes in #7965 (#10583, #11415, #10579)
 682 2018-01-11T19:18:26  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7965 | Remaining instances of ENABLE_WALLET in `libbitcoin_server.a` · Issue #7965 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 683 2018-01-11T19:18:29  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10583 | [RPC] Split part of validateaddress into getaddressinfo by achow101 · Pull Request #10583 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 684 2018-01-11T19:18:32  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11415 | [RPC] Disallow using addresses in createmultisig by achow101 · Pull Request #11415 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 685 2018-01-11T19:18:33  <jonasschnelli> promag: I guess the same problem
 686 2018-01-11T19:18:35  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10579 | [RPC] Split signrawtransaction into wallet and non-wallet RPC command by achow101 · Pull Request #10579 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 687 2018-01-11T19:18:47  <kanzure> hi.
 688 2018-01-11T19:18:48  <wumpus> jnewbery: those have nothing to do with segwit, so I moved them to 0.17
 689 2018-01-11T19:19:02  <jonasschnelli> Agree
 690 2018-01-11T19:19:19  <jnewbery> Shame. They deprecate the RPCs but don't remove them, so we're stuck with those wallet dependencies until v0.18
 691 2018-01-11T19:19:46  <wumpus> if we do a "theme release" at all we need to focus, sorry
 692 2018-01-11T19:19:48  <promag> jonasschnelli: should we "mark" those addresses until the rescan finishes?
 693 2018-01-11T19:19:51  <ryanofsky> 11415 maybe could be merged now
 694 2018-01-11T19:19:58  <jtimon> do #8994 and #10757 have a chance to get merged for 0.16 if I fix the nits?
 695 2018-01-11T19:20:00  <promag> jonasschnelli: future work I guess
 696 2018-01-11T19:20:01  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8994 | Testchains: Introduce custom chain whose constructor... by jtimon · Pull Request #8994 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 697 2018-01-11T19:20:05  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10757 | RPC: Introduce getblockstats to plot things by jtimon · Pull Request #10757 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 698 2018-01-11T19:20:13  <jonasschnelli> promag: Yes... probably... need to think about that first
 699 2018-01-11T19:20:19  <wumpus> no, we're not adding non-segwit features for 0.16
 700 2018-01-11T19:20:29  <BlueMatt> wumpus: oooo, "theme release", can we start themeing based on cocktails like openwrt?
 701 2018-01-11T19:20:41  <achow101> presumably 0.17 will be sooner than the usual 6 months?
 702 2018-01-11T19:20:48  <ryanofsky> ok so feature freeze has already started?
 703 2018-01-11T19:20:51  <wumpus> BlueMatt: lol!
 704 2018-01-11T19:21:02  <instagibbs> ryanofsky, non-segwit ff i believe so
 705 2018-01-11T19:21:04  <jonasschnelli> I think since merging SW wallet freeze is active
 706 2018-01-11T19:21:06  <wumpus> ryanofsky: for non-segwit things, yes, for segwit things it's open for sicussion
 707 2018-01-11T19:21:07  <cfields> BlueMatt: by that you mean "white russian" (or something) for ~5 years, iirc?
 708 2018-01-11T19:21:07  <instagibbs> qt stuff might still be required
 709 2018-01-11T19:21:08  <BlueMatt> yes, didnt we say feature freeze when segwit wallet got merged
 710 2018-01-11T19:21:10  <achow101> ryanofsky: I'm guessing feature freeze started last night as soon as 11403 merged
 711 2018-01-11T19:21:22  <wumpus> BlueMatt: yes
 712 2018-01-11T19:21:22  <BlueMatt> cfields: yea......
 713 2018-01-11T19:21:31  <jtimon> achow101: really? I thought 0.16 was the exception and we're getting close to its regular planned non ahead of time date
 714 2018-01-11T19:21:39  <jonasschnelli> no
 715 2018-01-11T19:21:42  <promag> btw, 17 theme is?
 716 2018-01-11T19:21:53  <wumpus> achow101: we could do 0.17 sooner, but one thing at a time please, this is for discussion once 0.16 is out of the door :)
 717 2018-01-11T19:21:57  <BlueMatt> promag: white russian, apparently
 718 2018-01-11T19:22:13  <wumpus> no theme for 0.17, no themes again please, back to simply time based releases
 719 2018-01-11T19:22:24  <meshcollider> wumpus: you mean 17.0 ;)
 720 2018-01-11T19:22:34  <provoostenator> Given that the world demands SegWit from the Core wallet, I tend to agree about feature freeze for non-SegWit stuff.
 721 2018-01-11T19:22:43  <jtimon> BlueMatt: it seems tohe feature freeze is being done sooner than that
 722 2018-01-11T19:22:49  <provoostenator> And I guess it's about hte regular time to release anyway?
 723 2018-01-11T19:22:52  <wumpus> segwit was an exception because that was 'promised' for 0.15.1, I don't think this should become routine
 724 2018-01-11T19:23:27  <achow101> provoostenator: I think there's still 2 months left for the usual timing
 725 2018-01-11T19:23:51  <wumpus> yes, we're intentionally trying to do the release sooner than the usual planning
 726 2018-01-11T19:24:12  <wumpus> (e.g. the one in #11449 is worst-case)
 727 2018-01-11T19:24:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11449 | Release schedule for 0.16.0 · Issue #11449 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 728 2018-01-11T19:24:30  <MarcoFalke> Is #10387 a blocker for 0.16?
 729 2018-01-11T19:24:33  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10387 | Eventually connect to NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED peers by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10387 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 730 2018-01-11T19:24:34  *** jeremymbolin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 731 2018-01-11T19:24:50  <jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: no... can go into 0.17 IMO
 732 2018-01-11T19:24:53  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: I don't know, let's discuss
 733 2018-01-11T19:24:54  <jonasschnelli> Or why would it be?
 734 2018-01-11T19:24:59  <jtimon> I thought the only blocker for 0.16 was #11403 ?
 735 2018-01-11T19:25:03  <BlueMatt> its pending on gmaxwell, just need his ack, I think
 736 2018-01-11T19:25:05  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11403 | SegWit wallet support by sipa · Pull Request #11403 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 737 2018-01-11T19:25:34  <BlueMatt> but, its def a "feature"
 738 2018-01-11T19:25:38  <jonasschnelli> 10387 is independent from the BIP159 signalling.... connecting would be nice though, but includes some risks.. so no hurry with that
 739 2018-01-11T19:25:39  <BlueMatt> we're doing the bit announce on master already
 740 2018-01-11T19:25:46  <wumpus> ok moving it to 0.17
 741 2018-01-11T19:25:48  <BlueMatt> so thats ok for it to go 17
 742 2018-01-11T19:26:14  <jonasschnelli> Ah,.. did 10387 still had the 0.16 tag?, Yes. Needs a 0.17 then
 743 2018-01-11T19:26:35  <wumpus> that leaves 13 open things in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/30
 744 2018-01-11T19:26:51  <wumpus> (including the release notes and the release schedule itself)
 745 2018-01-11T19:27:25  <sipa> oops, i'm here
 746 2018-01-11T19:27:33  <BlueMatt> lol
 747 2018-01-11T19:27:35  <sipa> timezone confusion
 748 2018-01-11T19:28:02  <BlueMatt> sipa: plx comment on 11281
 749 2018-01-11T19:28:02  <jonasschnelli> we need a core meeting alarm/notification service
 750 2018-01-11T19:28:12  <BlueMatt> also pending segwit wallet work
 751 2018-01-11T19:28:16  <BlueMatt> whats still missing?
 752 2018-01-11T19:28:18  <meshcollider> Does anything actually need to be done for #11048
 753 2018-01-11T19:28:19  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11048 | Weird gettransaction details on testnet with segwit · Issue #11048 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 754 2018-01-11T19:28:20  <jonasschnelli> sipa, Bluemat refers to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11281/commits/b2cc7020956cfd36925e4957493cd28d1d6f672e
 755 2018-01-11T19:28:40  <provoostenator> How do I add myself to the fancy meeting username mention ping?
 756 2018-01-11T19:28:55  <instagibbs> gotta tip wumpus some bch
 757 2018-01-11T19:28:59  *** jeremymbolin has quit IRC
 758 2018-01-11T19:29:23  <achow101> lol
 759 2018-01-11T19:29:23  <meshcollider> instagibbs: lol
 760 2018-01-11T19:29:25  <sipa> yeah will do, on my phone in a bar now
 761 2018-01-11T19:29:33  *** machaans has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 762 2018-01-11T19:29:36  <instagibbs> RWC?
 763 2018-01-11T19:29:40  <wumpus> instagibbs: please no, no need to threaten me, will add him :)
 764 2018-01-11T19:29:51  <sipa> instagibbs: yes
 765 2018-01-11T19:29:52  *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 766 2018-01-11T19:30:18  <BlueMatt> sipa: woke up in a bar?
 767 2018-01-11T19:30:42  <sipa> BlueMatt: just charged my phone  and saw your signal msg
 768 2018-01-11T19:30:43  <jonasschnelli> heh
 769 2018-01-11T19:31:22  <cfields> so apparrently BlueMatt is the core meeting alarm service
 770 2018-01-11T19:31:26  <instagibbs> provoostenator, what's the status of -qt PR for 0.16? I'm kind of out of it but am willing to test with my branch
 771 2018-01-11T19:32:05  <wumpus> any other topics?
 772 2018-01-11T19:32:06  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 773 2018-01-11T19:32:19  <luke-jr> hi
 774 2018-01-11T19:32:27  <provoostenator> instagibbs: #11991
 775 2018-01-11T19:32:27  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kekimusmaximus opened pull request #12158: Avoid unnecessary copy of objects. (master...avoid_copies) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12158
 776 2018-01-11T19:32:30  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11991 | [qt] Receive: checkbox for bech32 address by Sjors · Pull Request #11991 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 777 2018-01-11T19:32:37  <BlueMatt> lol, ok, everyone's here, start over now?
 778 2018-01-11T19:32:39  <luke-jr> #12146 should be tagged 0.16 too
 779 2018-01-11T19:32:40  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12146 | Wallet: Support disabling implicit Segwit operation by luke-jr · Pull Request #12146 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 780 2018-01-11T19:32:56  <provoostenator> Bit of discussion about the UI... but otherwise ready to go.
 781 2018-01-11T19:33:03  <gmaxwell> ^ 11991 seems like an obvious and easy win.
 782 2018-01-11T19:33:16  <sipa> #11991
 783 2018-01-11T19:33:19  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11991 | [qt] Receive: checkbox for bech32 address by Sjors · Pull Request #11991 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 784 2018-01-11T19:33:44  <luke-jr> indeed, I'd also suggest the bech32 change thing
 785 2018-01-11T19:34:20  <gmaxwell> yes, the "use native change if destinations are native"?  I think that makes a lot of sense.
 786 2018-01-11T19:34:24  <luke-jr> #12119
 787 2018-01-11T19:34:26  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12119 | [wallet] use bech32 change address if any destination is bech32 by Sjors · Pull Request #12119 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 788 2018-01-11T19:34:41  <provoostenator> bech32 change thing needs a small refactor which I'll try to do tomorrow. But also has some discussion about which circumstances should trigger bech32 use. Please weigh in...
 789 2018-01-11T19:34:48  <wumpus> both 11991 and 12119 are already in the 0.16 milestone
 790 2018-01-11T19:34:53  <gmaxwell> The whole reason we didn't _always_ use native change was privacy, but if the outputs are native, then that same argument says we should use native.
 791 2018-01-11T19:35:08  <provoostenator> What about inputs?
 792 2018-01-11T19:35:17  <sipa> arguably you could just uniformly ranomly pick the address type of 1 of the inputs, and make the change that
 793 2018-01-11T19:35:26  <gmaxwell> provoostenator: I think they're irrelevant.
 794 2018-01-11T19:35:41  <wumpus> sipa: sounds like a plan
 795 2018-01-11T19:35:47  <gmaxwell> sipa: I don't think that makes any sense.
 796 2018-01-11T19:35:53  <provoostenator> As in: if any input or any output is bech32, use bech32, unless changeaddress param says otherwise. .... ok, why intput irrelevant?
 797 2018-01-11T19:35:54  <luke-jr> wumpus: 12146 isn't yet.
 798 2018-01-11T19:36:04  * sipa meh 12146
 799 2018-01-11T19:36:09  <wumpus> luke-jr: seems like that needs some more discussion
 800 2018-01-11T19:36:09  <gmaxwell> Why would it possibly be relevant in any way?
 801 2018-01-11T19:36:13  <instagibbs> we want to frustrate chain analysis, mimicking the payment as much as possible is ++
 802 2018-01-11T19:36:19  <promag> gmaxwell: what if someone wants 0.16 to behave like 0.15?
 803 2018-01-11T19:36:39  <luke-jr> wumpus: releasing Segwit wallet without it is a problem for people who don't want to use Segwit.
 804 2018-01-11T19:36:43  <provoostenator> We also want to reduce fees.
 805 2018-01-11T19:36:50  <gmaxwell> The only reason to not always use native, assuming you are using segwit to begin with in your wallet, is that it would make it easier to tell which of the outputs are change.
 806 2018-01-11T19:36:56  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: define don't use?
 807 2018-01-11T19:37:16  <wumpus> luke-jr: just don't use the segwit address types then?
 808 2018-01-11T19:37:17  <gmaxwell> But that doesn't apply if the outputs (any of them, arguably) are native.
 809 2018-01-11T19:37:20  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: never have a Segwit UTXO despite what anyone else may do
 810 2018-01-11T19:37:25  <provoostenator> So in other words, if you're spending from a bech32 address, there's no reason _not_ to use a native address as change?
 811 2018-01-11T19:37:39  <luke-jr> wumpus: without 12146, people can malleate your address and you'll never know
 812 2018-01-11T19:37:39  <gmaxwell> provoostenator: no!
 813 2018-01-11T19:37:42  <instagibbs> provoostenator, ??
 814 2018-01-11T19:37:52  <wumpus> is address malleation a thing now?
 815 2018-01-11T19:37:59  <provoostenator> It saves fees and there's no privacy downside, what am I missing?
 816 2018-01-11T19:38:07  <sipa> luke-jr: they can already
 817 2018-01-11T19:38:11  <gmaxwell> Again, inputs are irrelevant-- I can't figure out why you think inputs are at all relevant.
 818 2018-01-11T19:38:12  <jonasschnelli> provoostenator: he's worried about block size increase
 819 2018-01-11T19:38:17  <sipa> and have forever
 820 2018-01-11T19:38:24  <jonasschnelli> as sipa said,.. it was also possible by p2pk -> p2pkh
 821 2018-01-11T19:38:27  <luke-jr> sipa: with 12146, you would at least notice / not accept it
 822 2018-01-11T19:38:36  <sipa> luke-jr: why not? it's cheaper!
 823 2018-01-11T19:38:38  <jonasschnelli> s/was/is
 824 2018-01-11T19:38:48  <luke-jr> sipa: what?
 825 2018-01-11T19:39:03  <wumpus> would anyone use that at all, why would it be worth maintaining?
 826 2018-01-11T19:39:12  <sipa> you're lucky if someone sends you a witness output instead anyone of p2pkh
 827 2018-01-11T19:39:13  <jonasschnelli> I think luke-jr argument are more political/philosophical then technical/economical
 828 2018-01-11T19:39:20  <wumpus> it just complicates all kinds of logic
 829 2018-01-11T19:39:29  <gmaxwell> provoostenator: the privacy downside arises when your pay to a non-segwit destination.  If you pay a non-segwit destination but make a native output as change, then which of the outputs is change is far more easily identified.
 830 2018-01-11T19:39:30  <luke-jr> wumpus: because using Segwit enables miners to increase block size, and has no benefits for the current wallet.
 831 2018-01-11T19:39:37  <instagibbs> i think this is going to be another "no one else agrees" type argument, sorry luke-jr
 832 2018-01-11T19:39:39  <sipa> (i think it's really bad that we accept outputs to addresses we didn'√ give out)
 833 2018-01-11T19:39:41  <BlueMatt> provoostenator: its still a privacy leak, you're (probably) much, much more likely to use non-bech32 outputs as non-change, so irrespective of the inputs you'd be pretty clearly tagging your change output
 834 2018-01-11T19:40:06  <sipa> but it's not specific to segwit, and needs fixing independently
 835 2018-01-11T19:40:07  <instagibbs> simply not handing out those addresses should be enough... sender doesn't care if you want to spend more later
 836 2018-01-11T19:40:10  <BlueMatt> provoostenator: in fact, even worse, you're tagging it *because* your inputs are bech32 you're making clear that you support segwit in your wallet, so the bech32 output is *most likely* the change
 837 2018-01-11T19:40:27  <luke-jr> instagibbs: the sender can trick you into accepting Segwit without 12146
 838 2018-01-11T19:40:27  <wumpus> instagibbs: indeed
 839 2018-01-11T19:40:35  <instagibbs> luke-jr, worse, the sender *wont know* you don't implictly convert, leading to a orphaned utxo!
 840 2018-01-11T19:40:36  <wumpus> 'trick you into accepting segwit'
 841 2018-01-11T19:40:48  <instagibbs> whatever jerk is doing that
 842 2018-01-11T19:40:48  <gmaxwell> But if the other outputs are native, then this issue doesn't exist.
 843 2018-01-11T19:41:00  <luke-jr> instagibbs: orphaned UTXO is exactly the expected outcome
 844 2018-01-11T19:41:04  <luke-jr> instagibbs: and that's his fault
 845 2018-01-11T19:41:06  <Chris_St1> so the debate is whether we are creating the change output as the same script type as the payment output in a two output scenario?
 846 2018-01-11T19:41:07  <instagibbs> .....
 847 2018-01-11T19:41:11  <wumpus> man, that sounds like it should be prosecuted as a war crime
 848 2018-01-11T19:41:11  *** Tennis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 849 2018-01-11T19:41:32  <provoostenator> Alright, so rule should be: ignore inputs, if any output is bech32, use bech32 for change, unless setting overrides?
 850 2018-01-11T19:41:36  <luke-jr> Chris_St1: there's two parallel conversations going on here now :/
 851 2018-01-11T19:41:49  <provoostenator> luke-jr: yes, IRC needs threads
 852 2018-01-11T19:42:09  <wumpus> #topic when to use bech32 for change
 853 2018-01-11T19:42:11  <wumpus> ^^
 854 2018-01-11T19:42:13  <meshcollider> provoostenator: yes that's most sensible
 855 2018-01-11T19:42:16  <BlueMatt> provoostenator: thats not a bad idea, imo
 856 2018-01-11T19:42:17  <Chris_St1> what about when there are more than two outputs? Or are we just worried about GUI?
 857 2018-01-11T19:42:19  * jtimon thinks about what "trick you into accepting segwit" may mean...
 858 2018-01-11T19:42:31  <instagibbs> Chris_St1, privacy mostly
 859 2018-01-11T19:42:37  <gmaxwell> provoostenator: thats my belief.
 860 2018-01-11T19:42:41  <meshcollider> Was sipa suggestion of random choice serious or a joke
 861 2018-01-11T19:42:44  <provoostenator> Chris_St1: _any_ output, not _all_
 862 2018-01-11T19:42:47  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
 863 2018-01-11T19:42:49  <instagibbs> meshcollider, serious to me, makes sense
 864 2018-01-11T19:43:00  <luke-jr> IMO any output makes sense.
 865 2018-01-11T19:43:01  <gmaxwell> provoostenator: I think someone could reasonable argue that it should be "if a majority" rather than any.
 866 2018-01-11T19:43:03  <cfields> don't you lose the change privacy if there's a mix of segwit output types, though?
 867 2018-01-11T19:43:04  <meshcollider> Yeah was unsure if there's any downside
 868 2018-01-11T19:43:09  <wumpus> meshcollider: I think he was serious, it makes sense, less deterministic the change choice the better
 869 2018-01-11T19:43:20  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 870 2018-01-11T19:43:33  <Chris_St1> instagibbs: yes, but what if you a 3 segwit payment outputs and 2 p2pkh payment outputs, what is the change type?
 871 2018-01-11T19:43:37  <gmaxwell> I think "all" is obviously too strong.
 872 2018-01-11T19:43:37  <cfields> if there's a p2wsh output and change goes to p2wpkh, that's obvious
 873 2018-01-11T19:43:53  <instagibbs> Chris_St1, arguments to be had. Could flip weighted coin, could just pick the cheapest to mimic
 874 2018-01-11T19:44:00  <instagibbs> (native)
 875 2018-01-11T19:44:03  <gmaxwell> cfields: "segwit" here means native.
 876 2018-01-11T19:44:04  <morcos> I don't think its worth going overboard with complication.   If you are super privacy conscious you can manually do what you want, otherwise we should make the default what makes sense for the network.
 877 2018-01-11T19:44:11  <morcos> So I like provoostenator's idea
 878 2018-01-11T19:44:15  *** mgeuirx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 879 2018-01-11T19:44:24  <provoostenator> Chris_St1: bech32 in my proposal s well as the majority proposol (which I think it's a bit complicated...)
 880 2018-01-11T19:44:28  <Chris_St1> morcos: But that erodes the privacy of *everyone*. see zcash?
 881 2018-01-11T19:44:59  <morcos> Chris_St1: i don't think that analogy applies
 882 2018-01-11T19:45:03  <gmaxwell> Any is what I proposed on the PR, though I noted that "majority" would also be defensible.  Requiring all, or worse, not using native even if all are native is bad for privacy.
 883 2018-01-11T19:45:07  <BlueMatt> yea, majority-are-native or signle-is-native are both fine with me
 884 2018-01-11T19:45:13  <luke-jr> weighed random?
 885 2018-01-11T19:45:16  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 886 2018-01-11T19:45:31  <gmaxwell> I think it's okay to bias some here towards the more cost effective form.
 887 2018-01-11T19:45:36  <morcos> well maybe, but thats why we're preservign some level of privacy...  in that we only use bech32 for change if we're paying at least one bech32 address
 888 2018-01-11T19:45:37  <wumpus> yes
 889 2018-01-11T19:45:38  <instagibbs> hiding with other segwit wallets imo is your best bet anyways...
 890 2018-01-11T19:45:49  <gmaxwell> also the difference between these things only matters for sendmany...
 891 2018-01-11T19:45:51  *** JayBerg has quit IRC
 892 2018-01-11T19:45:52  <provoostenator> luke-jr: I that would be a great way for me to demonstrate my C++ incompetence :-)
 893 2018-01-11T19:46:07  * sipa is fine with (if not otherwise configured) using any bech32 -> change is bech32
 894 2018-01-11T19:46:23  *** Chris_St1 has quit IRC
 895 2018-01-11T19:46:25  <jnewbery> any-output-is-native seems reasonable to me
 896 2018-01-11T19:46:25  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 897 2018-01-11T19:46:32  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 898 2018-01-11T19:46:41  <achow101> same
 899 2018-01-11T19:46:42  <gmaxwell> sipa: I think my suggestion was "unless configured that change should be legacy, change is native if any output is native".
 900 2018-01-11T19:46:57  <morcos> i think non-determinism in what kind of change address you have is just ick..  especially since the p2sh-wrapped kind is temporary
 901 2018-01-11T19:47:00  <provoostenator> As for luke-jr's point: having some flag to completely opt-out of SegWit seems reasonable to me.
 902 2018-01-11T19:47:04  <gmaxwell> (or if anyone felt that was too strong, change is native unless the majority is non-native; but it seems no one does)
 903 2018-01-11T19:47:05  <sipa> gmaxwell: and p2sh-p2wsh otherwise?
 904 2018-01-11T19:47:13  <gmaxwell> sipa: yes.
 905 2018-01-11T19:47:20  <sipa> makes snese
 906 2018-01-11T19:47:35  <Chris_Stewart_5> gmaxwell: by native you mean p2wpkh?
 907 2018-01-11T19:47:37  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 908 2018-01-11T19:47:41  <gmaxwell> sipa: so if you set yourself to be legacy, you'll stay legacy regardless, in order to respect any weird requirement to avoid creating segwit outputs.
 909 2018-01-11T19:48:08  <instagibbs> morcos, if it has native change is native is entirely determinstic, luckily
 910 2018-01-11T19:48:21  <instagibbs> sorry, has native, comma, change is native
 911 2018-01-11T19:48:52  <gmaxwell> morcos: I think you were responding to things like "weighed random change types"
 912 2018-01-11T19:49:03  <morcos> correct
 913 2018-01-11T19:49:06  <BlueMatt> more topics?
 914 2018-01-11T19:49:24  <luke-jr> back to 12146?
 915 2018-01-11T19:49:26  <gmaxwell> yea, I could go for weighed-random change types if the choice were otherwise neutral, but it's not.
 916 2018-01-11T19:49:31  * BlueMatt notes that it really would be nice to see #12118 in 0.16, just because its really a free 5% speedup in removeForBlock which is a big chunk of block validation latency....
 917 2018-01-11T19:49:33  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12118 | Sort mempool by min(feerate, ancestor_feerate) by sdaftuar · Pull Request #12118 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 918 2018-01-11T19:49:39  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 919 2018-01-11T19:49:45  <instagibbs> luke-jr, Creating utxo bloat to *slightly* reduce blocksize is weird weird feature to add imo
 920 2018-01-11T19:49:51  <instagibbs> (if we've transitioned)
 921 2018-01-11T19:49:57  <luke-jr> instagibbs: it's not UTXO bloat.
 922 2018-01-11T19:50:10  <BlueMatt> luke-jr: nack, just use 0.15.1 and focus on the real fix of splitting hd chain
 923 2018-01-11T19:50:11  <instagibbs> the scenario here is that some joker pays you, and you don't want to spend it, right?
 924 2018-01-11T19:50:25  <morcos> +1 BlueMatt
 925 2018-01-11T19:50:30  <BlueMatt> alternatively, this could be accomplished by using labels/accounts
 926 2018-01-11T19:50:40  <BlueMatt> label addresses and then payments will show up without the labels
 927 2018-01-11T19:50:44  <luke-jr> instagibbs: more or less
 928 2018-01-11T19:50:57  <luke-jr> BlueMatt: NACK, to myself and many others, mandatory Segwit wallet is a regression
 929 2018-01-11T19:51:06  <BlueMatt> then dont use 0.16
 930 2018-01-11T19:51:15  <luke-jr> so 0.15 is supported forever?
 931 2018-01-11T19:51:19  <gmaxwell> luke's argument is lame but there are other arguments for the position...  But I think it's ultimately futile.
 932 2018-01-11T19:51:21  <luke-jr> including new features?
 933 2018-01-11T19:51:31  <morcos> luke-jr: right, but thats basically the only feature, so just dont use it until we have the version that doesn't accept all variations of key encoding
 934 2018-01-11T19:51:32  <BlueMatt> if you want the option, do the real fix, not the dirty hack of working like 0.15.1
 935 2018-01-11T19:51:33  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: by anyone who cares to support it
 936 2018-01-11T19:51:36  <instagibbs> This feature doesn't make any sense to me though.
 937 2018-01-11T19:51:55  <luke-jr> BlueMatt: there isn't a better fix
 938 2018-01-11T19:51:56  <BlueMatt> (the real fix being splitting the hd chain so that we never identify as ours addresses other than the ones we gave out)
 939 2018-01-11T19:52:07  <morcos> ^ it's in sipas gist
 940 2018-01-11T19:52:11  <achow101> luke-jr: the real fix is using different hd paths
 941 2018-01-11T19:52:13  <sipa> indeed.
 942 2018-01-11T19:52:14  <BlueMatt> which sipa proposed (I believe to much agreement) as the long-term route for the wallet
 943 2018-01-11T19:52:15  <luke-jr> BlueMatt: that's more than a fix. :p
 944 2018-01-11T19:52:17  <gmaxwell> instagibbs: it's very bad that we support showing funds paid to addresses we never issued.  It invites really bad behavior that can cause irrecoverable funds loss.   But the ship has already sailed on that.
 945 2018-01-11T19:52:23  <instagibbs> gmaxwell, no I get the issue
 946 2018-01-11T19:52:30  <instagibbs> I don't get his fix, it's one-sided
 947 2018-01-11T19:52:39  <gmaxwell> ah.
 948 2018-01-11T19:52:56  <morcos> we all agree to fixing that, what we don't care about is that we are temporarily makign it worse for the case of giving out legacy and receiving segwit
 949 2018-01-11T19:52:57  <instagibbs> sender has no clue you won't accept it!(outside of us wagging fingers to not try it)
 950 2018-01-11T19:53:02  <gmaxwell> Well thats because his motivation isn't one of the sensible ones, it's because he's discouraging people from using segwit to keep the blocksize down.
 951 2018-01-11T19:53:10  <BlueMatt> luke-jr: it is more than a fix for your specific issue, but its much nicer and isnt ridiculous from a ux/maintainability perspective
 952 2018-01-11T19:53:13  <luke-jr> that is a sensible one
 953 2018-01-11T19:53:15  <BlueMatt> we dont need more options in the wallet...
 954 2018-01-11T19:53:19  <instagibbs> anyways, all i have to say. Let's fix the wallet.
 955 2018-01-11T19:53:35  <gmaxwell> I don't share his concern, but even if I did-- his fix isn't needed for it:  anyone autoconverting an address has a serious risk of funds loss already.
 956 2018-01-11T19:53:41  <provoostenator> luke-jr: what's wrong with launching with -addresstype=legacy?
 957 2018-01-11T19:53:42  <luke-jr> BlueMatt: 12146 is trivial
 958 2018-01-11T19:53:44  <morcos> luke-jr: would it help if we we very publicly communicated that our philosophy is to not accept payments except for addresses which have been given out?
 959 2018-01-11T19:53:45  <wumpus> certainly not options that only exist for some political goal and no one will actually use nor test
 960 2018-01-11T19:54:14  <morcos> we discussed doing that when we were making this change, b/c we knew we'd be making things worse on that front, but we'd already crossed the bridge with addwitnessaddress
 961 2018-01-11T19:54:18  <luke-jr> provoostenator: the current code will still accept Segwit payments to malleated addresses
 962 2018-01-11T19:54:18  <morcos> and other variants
 963 2018-01-11T19:54:19  *** indistylo has quit IRC
 964 2018-01-11T19:54:25  <BlueMatt> anyway, one more review on #12118 and slipping in past feature freeze would make me very happy...good to keep the march of performance improvements in block validation latency moving :)
 965 2018-01-11T19:54:27  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12118 | Sort mempool by min(feerate, ancestor_feerate) by sdaftuar · Pull Request #12118 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 966 2018-01-11T19:54:41  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: your change isn't needed to prevent autoconverting. Anyone who 'autoconverts' will have casual funds loss due to converted outputs being unreconized by older software, and _unrecoverable loss_ due to uncompressed pubkeys and potentially HSMs.
 967 2018-01-11T19:54:45  <cfields> instagibbs: at best, if you wag your finger and I'm forced to re-send a non-witness tx, that's 2x the tx's for that interaction. Not doing much to reduce block size...
 968 2018-01-11T19:55:08  <provoostenator> luke-jr: oh, you mean someone sees the public key after you spend it and then figures out how to send to its SegWit equivalent? I'm not sure if that actually works, see my backwards compatibility test PR.
 969 2018-01-11T19:55:13  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: that should be ample discouragement there.
 970 2018-01-11T19:55:16  <wumpus> morcos: would make sense to document that, though I wouldn't know where!
 971 2018-01-11T19:55:28  <jnewbery> Doesn't seem to me like this needs to be discussed for v0.16 release. Luke can maintain his patch in knots and everyone is happy. And then we can reconsider 12146 for 0.16.1
 972 2018-01-11T19:55:28  <instagibbs> cfields, what we need is a way of bloating the weight without taking up serialization space lol
 973 2018-01-11T19:55:30  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: all the more reason to allow people to avoid accepting the attempts
 974 2018-01-11T19:55:35  <provoostenator> But I don't see the point in ignoring such a transaction. There's certainly no way to stop it.
 975 2018-01-11T19:55:37  <achow101> provoostenator: given a p2pkh address, you can easily make the p2wpkh output without needing to see a transaction
 976 2018-01-11T19:55:38  <morcos> We can use the @bitcoin twitter handle maybe
 977 2018-01-11T19:55:48  <meshcollider> provoostenator: you don't need the public key, segwit addresses use PKH too
 978 2018-01-11T19:56:02  <wumpus> but a warning against 'malleating' addresses would make sense, I mean it's bad form and just because bitcoin core happens to accept it doesn't mean other wallets do
 979 2018-01-11T19:56:03  <luke-jr> provoostenator: it's an invalid payment
 980 2018-01-11T19:56:06  <gmaxwell> And yes, as morocos said, we knew that our handling of segwit would increase the risk that someone falsely believed they could autoconvert.  It was a tradeoff we made, otherwise segwit support would be delayed behind a massive redesign.
 981 2018-01-11T19:56:23  <luke-jr> morcos: It would probably be good to do so, but I'm not sure it accomplishes the same thing
 982 2018-01-11T19:56:40  <luke-jr> also, you *can't* malleate right now
 983 2018-01-11T19:56:41  <morcos> yes, so lets spend our time doing the redesign and communicating our intentions
 984 2018-01-11T19:56:42  <cfields> instagibbs: heh
 985 2018-01-11T19:56:50  <morcos> you can do other forms of malleation
 986 2018-01-11T19:56:52  <BlueMatt> </topic>? It seems like everyone agrees outside of luke, and there is a *real* solution...also easy to not use 0.16 for now
 987 2018-01-11T19:56:59  <sipa> luke-jr: you can use p2pk instead of p2pkh
 988 2018-01-11T19:57:04  <wumpus> BlueMatt: yes, any other topics?
 989 2018-01-11T19:57:07  <Chris_Stewart_5> PSA: if anyone is interested in talking more about #12131 or #12132 there is a development channel that some work has been occurring in: #bitcoin-mast
 990 2018-01-11T19:57:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12131 | [BIP-98 + BIP-116] MERKLEBRANCHVERIFY by kallewoof · Pull Request #12131 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 991 2018-01-11T19:57:10  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12132 | [BIP-117] Tail call semantics by kallewoof · Pull Request #12132 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 992 2018-01-11T19:57:12  <wumpus> oh 3 minutes to go
 993 2018-01-11T19:57:12  <luke-jr> sipa: only if you know the key, which only the recipient does
 994 2018-01-11T19:57:27  <morcos> aren't those a bit premature for PR's?
 995 2018-01-11T19:57:29  <arubi> sipa, then I'll trick you into accepting some big bare n-of-m with a bunch of pubkeys
 996 2018-01-11T19:57:29  <achow101> luke-jr: you can malleate it to a p2sh nested p2pkh
 997 2018-01-11T19:57:34  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I think it's adequate enough to let people know that if they do that, they _will_ lose funds, its effectively a guarentee.  some switch to willfully ignore the outputs in a recoverable way wouldn't help that message at all.
 998 2018-01-11T19:57:37  <arubi> (all of yours)
 999 2018-01-11T19:57:41  <gmaxwell> and basically no one but you would set it.
1000 2018-01-11T19:57:41  <morcos> is there any consensus at all around wanting those features?
1001 2018-01-11T19:57:51  <luke-jr> achow101: nope, pretty sure we won't accept that without adding it to the wallet explicitly
1002 2018-01-11T19:58:09  <sipa> achow101: as luke-jr says
1003 2018-01-11T19:58:14  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I don't agree only I would set it.
1004 2018-01-11T19:58:24  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: you can malleat addresses now fwiw, this is a long term design flaw in the wallet.
1005 2018-01-11T19:58:31  <gmaxwell> oh sipa pointed that out too
1006 2018-01-11T19:58:39  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: but you can't, as I pointed out
1007 2018-01-11T19:58:39  <wumpus> there's not really incentive for anyone to set a 'ignore some payments to me' setting, real user complaints are about not receiving payments...
1008 2018-01-11T19:58:41  <Chris_Stewart_5> morcos: I would say they are premature -- but I think they are definitely worht exploring more
1009 2018-01-11T19:58:41  <instagibbs> you can send people naked multisig...
1010 2018-01-11T19:58:42  <instagibbs> lol
1011 2018-01-11T19:58:51  <Chris_Stewart_5> if that was directed at me
1012 2018-01-11T19:58:55  <sipa> instagibbs: indeed
1013 2018-01-11T19:58:58  <luke-jr> instagibbs: !
1014 2018-01-11T19:59:03  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: something like 80% of addresses are reused...
1015 2018-01-11T19:59:05  <arubi> and with a bunch of pubkeys
1016 2018-01-11T19:59:19  <morcos> Chris_Stewart_5: yes...  i just wasnt sure if i was behind the times...
1017 2018-01-11T19:59:27  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: unsupported use case, not relevant to the discussion, but instagibbs found an example case
1018 2018-01-11T19:59:27  <gmaxwell> as wumpus says, the incentives are against setting that knob.
1019 2018-01-11T19:59:40  <instagibbs> I guess that's another argument, there are tons of ways of malleating it, let's just fix the wallet instead.
1020 2018-01-11T19:59:42  <Chris_Stewart_5> morcos: Also why we should discuss the development in a separate channel IMO as it is a little speculative still
1021 2018-01-11T19:59:44  <wumpus> gmaxwell: also thanks to some exchanges that have a limit on the number of deposit addresses
1022 2018-01-11T19:59:46  <sipa> instagibbs: indeed
1023 2018-01-11T20:00:02  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1024 2018-01-11T20:00:06  <sipa> DING
1025 2018-01-11T20:00:10  <wumpus> #endmeeting
1026 2018-01-11T20:00:10  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Jan 11 20:00:10 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
1027 2018-01-11T20:00:10  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-01-11-19.00.html
1028 2018-01-11T20:00:10  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-01-11-19.00.txt
1029 2018-01-11T20:00:10  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-01-11-19.00.log.html
1030 2018-01-11T20:00:23  * luke-jr glares at a certain Amazon wrapper that won't let him generate even a second address at all
1031 2018-01-11T20:00:49  <gmaxwell> Yea, thats my point: regardless of any willfully-ignore-naughty-payments-knob  other vectors exist... and if someone does segwit convert random stuff, they're going to lose funds in an unrecoverable way.
1032 2018-01-11T20:01:27  <meshcollider> Since when do all PR mentions get added to the minutes
1033 2018-01-11T20:01:43  <achow101> I don't think any wallet that people use actually does that sort of conversion. It would have to be someone either being malicious or using their own faulty software
1034 2018-01-11T20:02:05  <gmaxwell> achow101: no of course not, it will immediately cause unrecoverable funds loss.
1035 2018-01-11T20:02:20  <luke-jr> so outcome of conversation: I consider it reasonable to not have 12146 (so I won't be too upset if it doesn't get in), but not quite so reasonable to reject it for no reason (so I will be disappointed).
1036 2018-01-11T20:02:32  <gmaxwell> achow101: one of the concerns we had with the design we used here is we chose a design where it will sometimes work... and this may encourage someone to try it with the belief that it always works.
1037 2018-01-11T20:03:09  <gmaxwell> achow101: which is unfortunate, but no option was great.
1038 2018-01-11T20:03:30  <luke-jr> btw, if someone can quickly unlock #11403 for conversation, I'd like to Post-merge utACK it
1039 2018-01-11T20:03:35  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11403 | SegWit wallet support by sipa · Pull Request #11403 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1040 2018-01-11T20:03:52  <meshcollider> Yeah why can't all members comment on locked PRs/issues
1041 2018-01-11T20:04:06  <achow101> meshcollider: you need to have write access to the repo
1042 2018-01-11T20:04:11  <achow101> which means you could commit
1043 2018-01-11T20:04:12  <gmaxwell> achow101: and an opt out knob really doesn't educate people more:  The issue with it working at all is people incorrectly thinking that they can do it and people can collect their funds simply by upgrading.  Adding a knob would make it so that they falsely believed people could collect their funds simply by flipping the knob back.
1044 2018-01-11T20:04:24  <gmaxwell> achow101: when in reality some people are still using uncompressed keys...
1045 2018-01-11T20:04:28  <BlueMatt> luke-jr: lol no? outcome is consider it as-is unreasonable, but if you want to fix the broader issue, sounds great!
1046 2018-01-11T20:04:43  <gmaxwell> meshcollider: github sucks.
1047 2018-01-11T20:04:51  <achow101> gmaxwell: oh yeah, uncompressed keys. that would be a problem
1048 2018-01-11T20:04:59  <gmaxwell> achow101: or HSMs.
1049 2018-01-11T20:05:07  <achow101> lol, armory has that problem...
1050 2018-01-11T20:05:18  <gmaxwell> Someone could have their key potted in a hardware device where it can never be exported.. and which can't sign segwit style.
1051 2018-01-11T20:07:11  <gmaxwell> when we talked about our style of segwit support, the concern was raised that because conversion would sometimes work it might cause fools and madmen to think it always works...  Unfortunately, we didn't really have any good alternative for segwit support.  Among other reasons backwards supporting the addwitnessaddress stuff more or less required us to go this route for now.
1052 2018-01-11T20:09:49  <gmaxwell> also geesh, please don't call someone manipulating your address malleation.
1053 2018-01-11T20:10:17  <wumpus> bitcoiners like to overload words with as many as possible different meanings
1054 2018-01-11T20:10:17  <gmaxwell> We already have far too many morons out there confused due to existing reuse of the word.
1055 2018-01-11T20:10:35  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: what do we call it then?
1056 2018-01-11T20:11:02  <luke-jr> mutilation? :p
1057 2018-01-11T20:11:42  <gmaxwell> Conversion? I dunno. though the surrounding issues could also arise without any conversion.
1058 2018-01-11T20:12:36  <gmaxwell> For example, a wallet could plausably not scan for any change outputs because it knows all that it creates.  If I go find one of your prior change addresses and pay it there is no reason to think the wallet would ever see it.  ... and in existing software (e.g. bitcoin core) the payment wouldn't show up even if it did see the funds.
1059 2018-01-11T20:12:38  <meshcollider> Hmm achow101 all branches are protected so then write access still does not allow members to push to them without explicit permission right?
1060 2018-01-11T20:13:08  <wumpus> meshcollider: correct
1061 2018-01-11T20:13:37  <achow101> meshcollider: oh!
1062 2018-01-11T20:13:47  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: AFAIK there is no common term for "someone attempted to 'pay me' by digging a hole in by back yard and leaving an envelope of money in it"... because outside of bitcoin no one is that @#$@# stupid. :)
1063 2018-01-11T20:13:48  *** Brandt13Hartmann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1064 2018-01-11T20:14:12  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: conversion is too innocent-sounding IMO
1065 2018-01-11T20:14:25  <achow101> write access means you can also tag things
1066 2018-01-11T20:14:26  <instagibbs> gmaxwell, IsChange logic is also kind loopy...
1067 2018-01-11T20:14:33  <luke-jr> anyway, gotta run
1068 2018-01-11T20:15:10  <cfields> out of curiosity, how to handle this with segwit v1? enforce incompatibility with all previous witness versions?
1069 2018-01-11T20:15:41  <sipa> cfields: have split chains first
1070 2018-01-11T20:15:48  <gmaxwell> every address type should be its own chain.
1071 2018-01-11T20:15:53  <sipa> that ^
1072 2018-01-11T20:16:06  <gmaxwell> so you just wouldn't see such a payment.
1073 2018-01-11T20:16:43  <cfields> right, ok
1074 2018-01-11T20:16:45  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1075 2018-01-11T20:16:49  <meshcollider> achow101: that could be a benefit :) but no I guess write access is too potent still
1076 2018-01-11T20:16:59  <gmaxwell> that would have been the prefered path for segwit wallet support, but it requires much more major changes _AND_ isn't compatible with the addwitness stuff people were already doing.
1077 2018-01-11T20:17:22  <gmaxwell> meshcollider: part of the problem with that too is that github might randomly stir what 'write access' could do at any time.
1078 2018-01-11T20:18:02  <meshcollider> gmaxwell: mhm true, the permission system doesn't seem very flexible
1079 2018-01-11T20:18:15  <cfields> petertod1: ping. Is there any canonical format for an opentimestamps proof?
1080 2018-01-11T20:18:52  <gmaxwell> github in general has a lot of anti features.
1081 2018-01-11T20:20:17  <gmaxwell> there was some thread on reddit where one group of ignorant people was screaming at another group of ignorant people with at claim that 0.16 wouldn't be out for a year because some random and usless github milestone "percentage" page said such and such.
1082 2018-01-11T20:20:23  *** machaans has quit IRC
1083 2018-01-11T20:20:50  <meshcollider> Heh
1084 2018-01-11T20:21:28  *** promag has quit IRC
1085 2018-01-11T20:22:09  *** owowo has quit IRC
1086 2018-01-11T20:22:53  <provoostenator> gmaxwell: I really like Github's code review UI, except that it doesn't email the full thread if someone says "fixed" in response to inline comment.
1087 2018-01-11T20:23:12  *** Deacyde has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1088 2018-01-11T20:23:25  <gmaxwell> the code review has gotten better at least.
1089 2018-01-11T20:23:26  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1090 2018-01-11T20:23:35  <provoostenator> Github also completely breaks down if a PR or issue becomes political.
1091 2018-01-11T20:24:19  <gmaxwell> not just 'political' but linked to on any part of the internet mostly populated by idiots.
1092 2018-01-11T20:24:31  <provoostenator> It was almost impossible to have a sane discussion about replay protection on the btc1 repo; you'd have 3 people making serious arguments and 100 ranting comments from others, including from people who do write code.
1093 2018-01-11T20:24:35  <gmaxwell> god help anyone who gets their repository linked in a youtube comment.
1094 2018-01-11T20:24:50  *** Deacydal has quit IRC
1095 2018-01-11T20:25:17  <provoostenator> I suppose "political" is a euphemism for  "linked to on any part of the internet mostly populated by idiots"
1096 2018-01-11T20:25:18  <Chris_Stewart_5> lol
1097 2018-01-11T20:25:38  <gmaxwell> They're highly correlated at least. :)
1098 2018-01-11T20:26:08  <provoostenator> I sometimes tweet out PR's; haven't seen too negative results for the Core ones, but I would think twice doing that for anything contentious.
1099 2018-01-11T20:28:31  <gmaxwell> I'm not sure about any of your tweets, but sometimes it does.
1100 2018-01-11T20:28:58  <gmaxwell> e.g. the announcements re the merge of the segwit PR inspired a half dozen really nasty comments on that PR (which people just deleted)
1101 2018-01-11T20:29:17  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102 2018-01-11T20:30:03  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1103 2018-01-11T20:30:57  *** Brandt13Hartmann has quit IRC
1104 2018-01-11T20:33:42  <provoostenator> I only have 1.5K followers and anyone who SegWit has probably unfollowed me by now.
1105 2018-01-11T20:33:57  *** dcousens has quit IRC
1106 2018-01-11T20:33:57  <provoostenator> *who hates
1107 2018-01-11T20:34:26  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1108 2018-01-11T20:37:11  *** anome has quit IRC
1109 2018-01-11T20:37:53  <provoostenator> gmaxwell: I'm guessing from the replies it was this tweet that attracted those folks: https://twitter.com/theonevortex/status/951479475908194304
1110 2018-01-11T20:38:15  *** hitesh8791 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1111 2018-01-11T20:38:26  *** owowo has quit IRC
1112 2018-01-11T20:39:13  *** hitesh8791_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1113 2018-01-11T20:43:04  *** hitesh8791 has quit IRC
1114 2018-01-11T20:43:29  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kekimusmaximus opened pull request #12159: Use the character based overload for std::string::find. (master...use_char_overload_find) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12159
1115 2018-01-11T20:43:36  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1116 2018-01-11T20:43:36  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1117 2018-01-11T20:43:36  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1118 2018-01-11T20:43:39  *** hitesh8791_ has quit IRC
1119 2018-01-11T20:46:49  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1120 2018-01-11T20:49:23  <gmaxwell> I probably should have brought up #11739 during the meetings.
1121 2018-01-11T20:49:25  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11739 | RFC: Enforce SCRIPT_VERIFY_P2SH and SCRIPT_VERIFY_WITNESS from genesis by sdaftuar · Pull Request #11739 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1122 2018-01-11T20:58:06  <promag> late suggestion, but how about -changetype=auto? (being that the default)
1123 2018-01-11T21:04:38  *** flokie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1124 2018-01-11T21:08:30  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1125 2018-01-11T21:09:10  *** mrannanay has quit IRC
1126 2018-01-11T21:10:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1127 2018-01-11T21:13:49  *** Juana5Kunde has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1128 2018-01-11T21:16:48  *** Chenpan has quit IRC
1129 2018-01-11T21:17:05  *** jtimon has quit IRC
1130 2018-01-11T21:17:24  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1131 2018-01-11T21:18:05  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132 2018-01-11T21:22:55  *** Juana5Kunde has quit IRC
1133 2018-01-11T21:30:13  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: I think you broke on rebase of #11281 - you deleted the pwallet->UpdateTimeFirstKey(1); call in importprivkey
1134 2018-01-11T21:30:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11281 | Avoid permanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #11281 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1135 2018-01-11T21:30:30  *** mike_28 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1136 2018-01-11T21:35:45  * BlueMatt is of the opinion #12118 can be merged
1137 2018-01-11T21:35:47  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12118 | Sort mempool by min(feerate, ancestor_feerate) by sdaftuar · Pull Request #12118 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1138 2018-01-11T21:37:29  <instagibbs> provoostenator, I think we have different definitions of actionable, haha
1139 2018-01-11T21:44:28  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1140 2018-01-11T21:48:55  *** quitobro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1141 2018-01-11T21:56:20  <sipa> instagibbs: is "cheaper" actionable? (just trying to understand your definition)
1142 2018-01-11T21:56:24  *** mike_28 has quit IRC
1143 2018-01-11T21:58:11  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
1144 2018-01-11T21:59:21  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1145 2018-01-11T22:02:05  *** Krellan has quit IRC
1146 2018-01-11T22:03:00  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1147 2018-01-11T22:03:58  *** clarkmoody_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1148 2018-01-11T22:04:03  <instagibbs> sipa, of course it is, but the comment was about privacy(which we agree users won't be able to act on)
1149 2018-01-11T22:05:52  <sipa> instagibbs: i'm confused
1150 2018-01-11T22:06:16  <sipa> instagibbs: how is "cheaper" actionable but "better privacy" isn't?
1151 2018-01-11T22:06:44  <instagibbs> the language says "may" or somesuch, and if the user googles, or whatever, they'll find nothing. I *guess* the could just get scared and never set it.
1152 2018-01-11T22:06:54  <instagibbs> so I take it back, whatever, it's just a super verbose message imo
1153 2018-01-11T22:06:56  *** clarkmoody has quit IRC
1154 2018-01-11T22:07:20  <sipa> instagibbs: oh no disagreement that it's too verbose
1155 2018-01-11T22:07:53  <instagibbs> also if uptake is quick(doubt, but possible) that users will be confronted with the message and go the wrong direction
1156 2018-01-11T22:08:25  <instagibbs> i think release notes might be the best place
1157 2018-01-11T22:14:06  *** Monique75Upton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1158 2018-01-11T22:14:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #12166: [docs] Clarify -walletdir usage (master...clarify_walletdir_usage) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12166
1159 2018-01-11T22:18:49  *** Monique75Upton has quit IRC
1160 2018-01-11T22:19:08  *** goatpig has quit IRC
1161 2018-01-11T22:20:34  <sipa> instagibbs: agree
1162 2018-01-11T22:21:18  *** quitobro has quit IRC
1163 2018-01-11T22:28:13  <promag> block index skiplist and GetAncestor don't require any lock right? it's computed before a blockindex is given out?
1164 2018-01-11T22:28:23  *** arbitrary_guy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1165 2018-01-11T22:29:13  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1166 2018-01-11T22:32:11  <sipa> promag: indeed
1167 2018-01-11T22:32:29  <sipa> every CBlockIndex has those permanently set
1168 2018-01-11T22:32:30  <promag> ty
1169 2018-01-11T22:36:12  *** unholymachine has quit IRC
1170 2018-01-11T22:36:18  *** cheese_ has quit IRC
1171 2018-01-11T22:36:44  *** unholymachine has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172 2018-01-11T22:37:13  *** quitobro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1173 2018-01-11T22:39:08  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1174 2018-01-11T22:39:42  *** belcher_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1175 2018-01-11T22:42:52  *** quitobro has quit IRC
1176 2018-01-11T22:43:09  <BlueMatt> promag: re: #11041: why do you want to use LookupBlockIndex inside CChainState?
1177 2018-01-11T22:43:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11041 | Add LookupBlockIndex by promag · Pull Request #11041 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1178 2018-01-11T22:43:21  <promag> BlueMatt: hold on there
1179 2018-01-11T22:43:27  <promag> I'll make it const
1180 2018-01-11T22:43:36  <BlueMatt> please dont do that in the same pr :(
1181 2018-01-11T22:43:43  <BlueMatt> dont really want to delay it further
1182 2018-01-11T22:43:49  <promag> and in validation.cpp just use mapBlockIndex directly
1183 2018-01-11T22:43:50  <BlueMatt> unless you want to make things more scripted-diff...
1184 2018-01-11T22:43:59  <BlueMatt> no, not validation.cpp, CChainState
1185 2018-01-11T22:44:10  <BlueMatt> outside of CChainState should all be const CBlockIndex, even in validation.cpp
1186 2018-01-11T22:44:17  <BlueMatt> but that may not be trivially possible quite yet
1187 2018-01-11T22:45:23  <BlueMatt> promag: you saw my outstanding pr to constify them with scritped-diffs, right? You're welcome to replace it if you want, but no use duplicating effort wholesale...
1188 2018-01-11T22:45:34  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1189 2018-01-11T22:45:51  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1190 2018-01-11T22:46:13  <BlueMatt> promag: also, generally, that pr is already one giant commit that does like 3 things....please try to script what you can and cut it down
1191 2018-01-11T22:46:24  <promag> +1
1192 2018-01-11T22:47:20  *** tknp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1193 2018-01-11T22:50:25  *** niska has quit IRC
1194 2018-01-11T22:51:26  <promag> curiosity, an off chain block could have 0 confirmations, why -1?
1195 2018-01-11T22:51:27  *** nullptr| has quit IRC
1196 2018-01-11T22:51:41  *** cheese_ has quit IRC
1197 2018-01-11T22:51:57  *** booyah has quit IRC
1198 2018-01-11T22:52:03  *** Lauda has quit IRC
1199 2018-01-11T22:52:20  *** niska has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1200 2018-01-11T22:52:58  *** nullptr| has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1201 2018-01-11T22:53:51  *** Lauda has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202 2018-01-11T22:53:57  *** instagibbs has quit IRC
1203 2018-01-11T22:55:05  *** kakobrekla has quit IRC
1204 2018-01-11T22:55:35  *** dcousens has quit IRC
1205 2018-01-11T22:57:02  *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1206 2018-01-11T22:58:31  *** kakobrekla has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1207 2018-01-11T22:58:59  *** wraithm has quit IRC
1208 2018-01-11T23:01:05  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1209 2018-01-11T23:10:39  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1210 2018-01-11T23:14:03  *** Michaela63Kassul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1211 2018-01-11T23:16:50  *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212 2018-01-11T23:19:26  *** JackH has quit IRC
1213 2018-01-11T23:31:55  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
1214 2018-01-11T23:36:31  *** esparragow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1215 2018-01-11T23:37:49  *** esparragow has quit IRC
1216 2018-01-11T23:40:49  *** Michaela63Kassul has quit IRC
1217 2018-01-11T23:52:56  <promag> gmaxwell: "it's a mistake to say "bech32" -- there is no address involved with change"
1218 2018-01-11T23:53:54  <promag> listunspent includes changes right? what will be "address" for change utxo?
1219 2018-01-11T23:56:09  <sipa> yes, bech32
1220 2018-01-11T23:56:32  <gmaxwell> promag: you're missing my point. One can use scripts which no address can be defined.
1221 2018-01-11T23:56:38  <gmaxwell> er s/can be/is/
1222 2018-01-11T23:56:51  <sipa> but if bech32 didn't exist, there would just be no way to show an address for such outputs, but they would have been totally possible to use
1223 2018-01-11T23:56:59  <gmaxwell> And if there were no bech32 defined we still could be using p2wpkh as change.
1224 2018-01-11T23:57:15  <gmaxwell> The fact that there is an address is incidental.
1225 2018-01-11T23:57:59  <gmaxwell> There are also other address encodings for that same script, e.g. BIP142 (though hopefully no one uses them)
1226 2018-01-11T23:58:40  <sipa> for certain types of addresses there even exist no address that can be derived from the output (e.g. ECDH based constructions like stealth addresses or CT)
1227 2018-01-11T23:59:17  *** larafale has quit IRC
1228 2018-01-11T23:59:18  <sipa> listunspent would just be unable to show an address for such outputs