1 2018-05-10T00:04:32  *** Tennis has quit IRC
  2 2018-05-10T00:45:58  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
  3 2018-05-10T00:48:52  *** belcher has quit IRC
  4 2018-05-10T00:54:42  *** promag has quit IRC
  5 2018-05-10T00:58:42  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2018-05-10T01:02:52  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
  7 2018-05-10T01:05:53  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  8 2018-05-10T01:13:16  *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
  9 2018-05-10T01:25:11  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2018-05-10T01:28:13  *** m8tion has quit IRC
 11 2018-05-10T01:35:48  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 12 2018-05-10T01:48:47  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2018-05-10T01:57:33  *** cubancorona has quit IRC
 14 2018-05-10T02:00:53  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 15 2018-05-10T02:47:16  *** nullptr| has quit IRC
 16 2018-05-10T02:48:20  <glaksmono> anyone is around?
 17 2018-05-10T02:49:42  *** nullptr| has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 18 2018-05-10T02:50:56  <sipa> glaksmono: sure
 19 2018-05-10T02:52:34  *** isis_ is now known as isis
 20 2018-05-10T02:55:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
 21 2018-05-10T02:55:22  *** glaksmon_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 22 2018-05-10T02:56:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2018-05-10T02:58:13  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
 24 2018-05-10T03:03:57  *** glaksmon_ has quit IRC
 25 2018-05-10T03:09:02  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 26 2018-05-10T03:09:23  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2018-05-10T03:11:18  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 28 2018-05-10T03:11:35  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 29 2018-05-10T03:13:30  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 30 2018-05-10T03:13:47  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2018-05-10T03:36:42  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 32 2018-05-10T03:36:59  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 33 2018-05-10T03:43:53  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 34 2018-05-10T03:45:00  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 35 2018-05-10T03:55:58  *** gwillen has quit IRC
 36 2018-05-10T03:56:35  *** gwillen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2018-05-10T04:15:14  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 38 2018-05-10T04:15:59  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 39 2018-05-10T04:17:07  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 40 2018-05-10T04:17:34  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2018-05-10T04:21:44  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 42 2018-05-10T04:22:08  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 43 2018-05-10T04:23:16  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 44 2018-05-10T04:25:20  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 45 2018-05-10T04:26:20  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 46 2018-05-10T04:26:42  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 47 2018-05-10T04:28:36  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 48 2018-05-10T04:28:57  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 49 2018-05-10T04:29:54  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 50 2018-05-10T04:29:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] leiyong1413 opened pull request #13206: Zerotoone (master...zerotoone) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13206
 51 2018-05-10T04:30:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #13206: Zerotoone (master...zerotoone) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13206
 52 2018-05-10T04:31:51  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 53 2018-05-10T04:33:36  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2018-05-10T04:35:31  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 55 2018-05-10T04:36:41  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 56 2018-05-10T04:37:08  *** cryptojanitor has quit IRC
 57 2018-05-10T04:38:08  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 58 2018-05-10T04:38:25  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 59 2018-05-10T04:40:19  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 60 2018-05-10T04:41:29  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 61 2018-05-10T04:58:29  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
 62 2018-05-10T04:58:43  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 63 2018-05-10T04:59:57  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 64 2018-05-10T05:04:05  *** sipa has quit IRC
 65 2018-05-10T05:05:10  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 66 2018-05-10T05:20:17  *** shnarf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2018-05-10T05:21:52  *** shnarf is now known as wolfie
 68 2018-05-10T05:22:21  *** wolfie is now known as Guest63669
 69 2018-05-10T05:27:11  *** Guest63669 has quit IRC
 70 2018-05-10T05:45:31  *** Yieazy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2018-05-10T05:46:32  *** Yieazy has quit IRC
 72 2018-05-10T05:47:08  *** sipa has quit IRC
 73 2018-05-10T05:54:32  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 74 2018-05-10T05:55:50  *** jcorgan has quit IRC
 75 2018-05-10T05:56:40  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 76 2018-05-10T05:58:04  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
 77 2018-05-10T05:58:04  *** Magma has quit IRC
 78 2018-05-10T05:59:27  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
 79 2018-05-10T05:59:45  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2018-05-10T06:10:33  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2018-05-10T06:22:19  <kallewoof> promag: Do you agree with the conclusions Nicolas and I made in #12634 regarding 0/1?
 82 2018-05-10T06:22:19  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 83 2018-05-10T06:22:21  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12634 | [refactor] Make TransactionWithinChainLimit more flexible by kallewoof · Pull Request #12634 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 84 2018-05-10T06:23:24  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 85 2018-05-10T06:23:32  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
 86 2018-05-10T06:24:09  *** Guest63669 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 87 2018-05-10T06:26:41  *** dafuq_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 88 2018-05-10T06:27:25  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 89 2018-05-10T06:30:03  *** murrayn has quit IRC
 90 2018-05-10T06:31:40  *** sipa has quit IRC
 91 2018-05-10T06:39:31  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 92 2018-05-10T06:42:04  *** jamesob has quit IRC
 93 2018-05-10T06:42:04  *** jnewbery has quit IRC
 94 2018-05-10T06:42:34  *** zxzzt has quit IRC
 95 2018-05-10T06:43:38  *** jnewbery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 96 2018-05-10T06:43:51  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2018-05-10T06:44:07  *** zxzzt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2018-05-10T06:53:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
 99 2018-05-10T06:53:09  *** jcorgan has quit IRC
100 2018-05-10T06:54:16  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
101 2018-05-10T06:54:44  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
102 2018-05-10T06:55:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
103 2018-05-10T06:55:03  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
104 2018-05-10T06:55:31  *** sanada has quit IRC
105 2018-05-10T06:55:44  *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
106 2018-05-10T06:56:16  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2018-05-10T06:57:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
108 2018-05-10T06:58:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
109 2018-05-10T06:58:53  <jonasschnelli> What exactly does the undocumented -forcecompactdb do?
110 2018-05-10T06:59:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
111 2018-05-10T06:59:41  <jonasschnelli> or say, what is the effect of leveldb's pdb->CompactRange(&slKey1, &slKey2);?
112 2018-05-10T07:00:16  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
113 2018-05-10T07:00:17  *** promag has quit IRC
114 2018-05-10T07:00:30  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
115 2018-05-10T07:07:33  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
116 2018-05-10T07:08:44  <fanquake> jonasschnelli #10526
117 2018-05-10T07:08:47  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10526 | Force on-the-fly compaction during pertxout upgrade by sipa · Pull Request #10526 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
118 2018-05-10T07:09:50  <fanquake> & #10985
119 2018-05-10T07:09:51  <kallewoof> jonasschnelli: The docs seem to indicate it clears up some space: https://godoc.org/github.com/syndtr/goleveldb/leveldb#DB.CompactRange
120 2018-05-10T07:09:52  <jonasschnelli> fanquake: Thanks for the research!
121 2018-05-10T07:09:52  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10985 | Add undocumented -forcecompactdb to force LevelDB compactions by sipa · Pull Request #10985 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
122 2018-05-10T07:10:04  <jonasschnelli> kallewoof: indeed. Thanks
123 2018-05-10T07:20:45  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
124 2018-05-10T07:28:13  *** Guest63669 is now known as shnarf
125 2018-05-10T07:29:40  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
126 2018-05-10T07:30:00  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
127 2018-05-10T07:31:55  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
128 2018-05-10T07:32:14  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
129 2018-05-10T08:01:25  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
130 2018-05-10T08:02:02  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2018-05-10T08:06:18  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
132 2018-05-10T08:07:54  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
133 2018-05-10T08:14:40  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
134 2018-05-10T08:22:13  *** booyah has quit IRC
135 2018-05-10T08:23:10  *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
136 2018-05-10T08:24:46  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
137 2018-05-10T08:27:59  <jonasschnelli> When I execute "generate 10" on a regtest node, it will only inv the most recent block to the connected peer
138 2018-05-10T08:27:59  <jonasschnelli> https://pastebin.com/raw/m7b39bRX
139 2018-05-10T08:28:05  <jonasschnelli> Is this also expected on mainnet?
140 2018-05-10T08:28:13  <jonasschnelli> Why only the last block? Concurrency issue?
141 2018-05-10T08:28:40  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142 2018-05-10T08:29:03  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
143 2018-05-10T08:29:04  *** Magma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
144 2018-05-10T08:32:12  *** harrymm has quit IRC
145 2018-05-10T08:33:16  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
146 2018-05-10T08:36:14  *** ajtowns[m] has quit IRC
147 2018-05-10T08:36:15  *** herzmeister[m] has quit IRC
148 2018-05-10T08:36:18  *** stepa[m] has quit IRC
149 2018-05-10T08:36:35  *** kewde[m] has quit IRC
150 2018-05-10T08:37:41  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2018-05-10T08:39:41  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
152 2018-05-10T08:40:34  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2018-05-10T08:41:40  *** joshb[m] has quit IRC
154 2018-05-10T08:41:40  *** squarfed[m] has quit IRC
155 2018-05-10T08:41:46  <promag> kallewoof: I'll take a look and I'll get back to you later ok?
156 2018-05-10T08:44:38  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
157 2018-05-10T08:47:40  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
158 2018-05-10T08:47:40  *** Magma has quit IRC
159 2018-05-10T08:48:34  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
160 2018-05-10T08:49:56  *** timothy has quit IRC
161 2018-05-10T08:52:08  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162 2018-05-10T08:53:20  <kallewoof> promag: No rush!
163 2018-05-10T08:56:51  *** timothy has quit IRC
164 2018-05-10T08:56:56  *** drizztbsd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
165 2018-05-10T09:04:02  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
166 2018-05-10T09:06:13  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
167 2018-05-10T09:06:13  *** Magma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
168 2018-05-10T09:06:21  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
169 2018-05-10T09:06:55  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
170 2018-05-10T09:11:28  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
171 2018-05-10T09:17:03  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172 2018-05-10T09:27:09  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
173 2018-05-10T09:27:32  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2018-05-10T09:27:32  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
175 2018-05-10T09:27:32  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
176 2018-05-10T09:30:55  *** joshb[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
177 2018-05-10T09:32:10  *** cryptojanitor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
178 2018-05-10T09:35:14  *** ExtraCrispy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
179 2018-05-10T09:35:29  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
180 2018-05-10T09:43:01  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
181 2018-05-10T09:44:11  *** rabidus has quit IRC
182 2018-05-10T09:45:56  *** rabidus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2018-05-10T09:48:56  *** windsok has quit IRC
184 2018-05-10T09:55:47  *** BiJa2ka2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
185 2018-05-10T10:11:17  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
186 2018-05-10T10:12:45  *** stepa[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
187 2018-05-10T10:12:45  *** squarfed[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
188 2018-05-10T10:12:45  *** herzmeister[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
189 2018-05-10T10:12:45  *** ajtowns[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
190 2018-05-10T10:12:46  *** kewde[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
191 2018-05-10T10:21:07  *** promag has quit IRC
192 2018-05-10T10:26:47  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
193 2018-05-10T10:29:30  *** promag has quit IRC
194 2018-05-10T10:35:57  *** Krellan has quit IRC
195 2018-05-10T10:36:25  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2018-05-10T11:00:09  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
197 2018-05-10T11:01:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
198 2018-05-10T11:02:17  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
199 2018-05-10T11:10:51  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
200 2018-05-10T11:11:12  *** BiJa2ka2 has quit IRC
201 2018-05-10T11:16:57  *** jtimon has quit IRC
202 2018-05-10T11:20:45  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
203 2018-05-10T11:23:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof opened pull request #13208: wallet rpc: constraints in send* methods (master...feature-sendtoaddress-constraints) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13208
204 2018-05-10T11:24:51  *** rabidus has quit IRC
205 2018-05-10T11:31:35  <fanquake> kallewoof looks like Travis is failing early on the CHECK DOC
206 2018-05-10T11:56:53  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
207 2018-05-10T12:03:10  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
208 2018-05-10T12:12:49  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
209 2018-05-10T12:18:01  *** promag has quit IRC
210 2018-05-10T12:22:40  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
211 2018-05-10T12:26:57  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
212 2018-05-10T12:27:43  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] glaksmono opened pull request #13209: [WIP] Refactoring platform-specific code in util.h/util.cpp (master...bitcoin-12697) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13209
213 2018-05-10T12:36:10  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
214 2018-05-10T12:36:42  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
215 2018-05-10T12:38:52  *** spinza has quit IRC
216 2018-05-10T12:40:51  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
217 2018-05-10T12:48:16  *** tryphe has quit IRC
218 2018-05-10T12:48:43  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
219 2018-05-10T12:51:00  *** tryphe has quit IRC
220 2018-05-10T12:51:23  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2018-05-10T12:55:08  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222 2018-05-10T12:55:12  *** tryphe has quit IRC
223 2018-05-10T12:58:07  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2018-05-10T13:11:44  *** owowo has quit IRC
225 2018-05-10T13:15:29  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2018-05-10T13:19:02  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
227 2018-05-10T13:19:49  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
228 2018-05-10T13:20:58  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
229 2018-05-10T13:23:15  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
230 2018-05-10T13:27:21  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
231 2018-05-10T13:31:08  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
232 2018-05-10T13:32:16  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
233 2018-05-10T13:34:02  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
234 2018-05-10T13:38:57  *** fanquake has quit IRC
235 2018-05-10T13:50:08  *** shnarf has quit IRC
236 2018-05-10T13:53:55  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
237 2018-05-10T13:56:25  *** cyumacedro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
238 2018-05-10T14:03:58  *** cyumacedro has quit IRC
239 2018-05-10T14:05:39  *** farmerwampum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
240 2018-05-10T14:10:08  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
241 2018-05-10T14:10:48  *** farmerwampum has quit IRC
242 2018-05-10T14:11:16  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
243 2018-05-10T14:12:34  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
244 2018-05-10T14:14:40  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2018-05-10T14:15:08  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2018-05-10T14:15:19  *** intcat has quit IRC
247 2018-05-10T14:15:47  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
248 2018-05-10T14:18:56  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
249 2018-05-10T14:20:41  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
250 2018-05-10T14:20:58  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
251 2018-05-10T14:23:03  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252 2018-05-10T14:23:13  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
253 2018-05-10T14:25:09  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
254 2018-05-10T14:25:26  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
255 2018-05-10T14:27:13  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
256 2018-05-10T14:27:18  *** anome has quit IRC
257 2018-05-10T14:27:48  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2018-05-10T14:29:25  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
259 2018-05-10T14:29:44  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
260 2018-05-10T14:33:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/196c5a947a07...f3e747ee775f
261 2018-05-10T14:33:50  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 09c6699 Suhas Daftuar: [qa] Handle disconnect_node race...
262 2018-05-10T14:33:51  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f3e747e MarcoFalke: Merge #13201: [qa] Handle disconnect_node race...
263 2018-05-10T14:34:48  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13201: [qa] Handle disconnect_node race (master...2018-05-rpc-disconnect-race) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13201
264 2018-05-10T14:39:23  *** dx25 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
265 2018-05-10T14:44:34  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
266 2018-05-10T14:45:45  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
267 2018-05-10T14:46:31  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
268 2018-05-10T14:50:18  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
269 2018-05-10T14:50:55  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
270 2018-05-10T14:51:47  <promag> achow101: hi, you have a bunch of nits in #13112: `try {` instead of `try\n` and missing space in `fprintf(stderr,"Error...`
271 2018-05-10T14:51:50  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13112 | Throw an error for unknown args by achow101 · Pull Request #13112 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
272 2018-05-10T14:54:03  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
273 2018-05-10T14:55:05  <Lauda> Is gettxoutsetinfo supposed to take a long time to process?
274 2018-05-10T14:55:17  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
275 2018-05-10T14:55:39  *** jcorgan has quit IRC
276 2018-05-10T14:55:39  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
277 2018-05-10T15:00:54  *** arubi has quit IRC
278 2018-05-10T15:01:10  *** promag has quit IRC
279 2018-05-10T15:01:21  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
280 2018-05-10T15:01:57  *** m8tion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
281 2018-05-10T15:03:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
282 2018-05-10T15:04:02  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
283 2018-05-10T15:04:17  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
284 2018-05-10T15:04:50  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
285 2018-05-10T15:05:24  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
286 2018-05-10T15:06:43  <wumpus> Lauda: yes
287 2018-05-10T15:06:54  <wumpus> Lauda: should be in the help message
288 2018-05-10T15:07:13  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
289 2018-05-10T15:07:16  <Lauda> Thanks!
290 2018-05-10T15:07:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f3e747ee775f...1c582503507b
291 2018-05-10T15:07:37  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 12d1b77 lmanners: [tests] Fixed intermittent failure in p2p_sendheaders.py....
292 2018-05-10T15:07:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1c58250 MarcoFalke: Merge #13192: [tests] Fixed intermittent failure in p2p_sendheaders.py....
293 2018-05-10T15:08:27  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13192: [tests] Fixed intermittent failure in p2p_sendheaders.py. (master...p2p_sendheaders) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13192
294 2018-05-10T15:16:19  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
295 2018-05-10T15:16:35  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
296 2018-05-10T15:18:30  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
297 2018-05-10T15:18:47  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
298 2018-05-10T15:20:43  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
299 2018-05-10T15:21:59  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
300 2018-05-10T15:23:00  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
301 2018-05-10T15:23:49  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302 2018-05-10T15:24:55  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
303 2018-05-10T15:26:24  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
304 2018-05-10T15:31:43  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
305 2018-05-10T15:32:00  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
306 2018-05-10T15:32:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jbampton opened pull request #13210: Trivial: Remove trailing whitespace from Python files (master...remove-whitespace) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13210
307 2018-05-10T15:33:54  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
308 2018-05-10T15:34:26  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
309 2018-05-10T15:38:21  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
310 2018-05-10T15:38:43  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
311 2018-05-10T15:41:57  *** Comerz2010 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312 2018-05-10T15:44:39  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
313 2018-05-10T15:46:12  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
314 2018-05-10T15:48:08  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
315 2018-05-10T15:48:25  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
316 2018-05-10T15:49:34  *** Randolf has quit IRC
317 2018-05-10T15:50:34  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
318 2018-05-10T15:51:08  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
319 2018-05-10T15:53:44  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
320 2018-05-10T15:55:02  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
321 2018-05-10T15:55:29  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
322 2018-05-10T16:02:57  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
323 2018-05-10T16:03:39  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
324 2018-05-10T16:05:02  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
325 2018-05-10T16:07:07  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
326 2018-05-10T16:09:02  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
327 2018-05-10T16:09:22  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
328 2018-05-10T16:11:29  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
329 2018-05-10T16:12:36  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
330 2018-05-10T16:13:36  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
331 2018-05-10T16:15:26  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332 2018-05-10T16:16:34  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
333 2018-05-10T16:16:52  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
334 2018-05-10T16:21:05  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
335 2018-05-10T16:26:47  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
336 2018-05-10T16:27:10  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
337 2018-05-10T16:28:27  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
338 2018-05-10T16:31:05  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
339 2018-05-10T16:31:37  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
340 2018-05-10T16:33:26  *** booyah has quit IRC
341 2018-05-10T16:34:26  *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
342 2018-05-10T16:36:35  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
343 2018-05-10T16:36:52  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
344 2018-05-10T16:37:59  *** zivl has quit IRC
345 2018-05-10T16:39:28  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
346 2018-05-10T16:41:35  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
347 2018-05-10T16:42:05  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
348 2018-05-10T16:42:55  *** anome has quit IRC
349 2018-05-10T16:45:41  *** jtimon has quit IRC
350 2018-05-10T16:46:08  *** zivl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
351 2018-05-10T16:56:05  *** ExtraCrispy has quit IRC
352 2018-05-10T16:58:03  *** Krellan has quit IRC
353 2018-05-10T16:59:15  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
354 2018-05-10T17:00:44  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
355 2018-05-10T17:01:16  *** Krellan has quit IRC
356 2018-05-10T17:01:50  *** cryptojanitor has quit IRC
357 2018-05-10T17:04:11  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
358 2018-05-10T17:04:57  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
359 2018-05-10T17:15:55  *** mistergold has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
360 2018-05-10T17:17:31  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
361 2018-05-10T17:17:40  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362 2018-05-10T17:25:06  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
363 2018-05-10T17:25:17  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
364 2018-05-10T17:27:26  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
365 2018-05-10T17:28:39  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
366 2018-05-10T17:29:01  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #13211: Use a semaphore or pipe for shutdown notification (master...2018_05_shutdown_notification) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13211
367 2018-05-10T17:29:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #13186: Use a semaphore to trigger shutdown procedures (master...shutdown-cv) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13186
368 2018-05-10T17:29:36  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
369 2018-05-10T17:31:54  *** ibrightly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
370 2018-05-10T17:41:17  *** promag has quit IRC
371 2018-05-10T17:41:21  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
372 2018-05-10T17:49:49  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
373 2018-05-10T17:50:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] lmanners opened pull request #13212: Net: Fixed a race condition when disabling the network. (master...setnetworkactive) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13212
374 2018-05-10T17:51:29  *** Bommelmuetze has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
375 2018-05-10T17:54:04  *** Randolf has quit IRC
376 2018-05-10T17:54:16  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
377 2018-05-10T17:56:15  *** Bommelmuetze has quit IRC
378 2018-05-10T18:06:07  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
379 2018-05-10T18:07:25  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
380 2018-05-10T18:07:59  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
381 2018-05-10T18:12:05  *** Krellan has quit IRC
382 2018-05-10T18:16:41  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
383 2018-05-10T18:17:08  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
384 2018-05-10T18:17:57  *** drizztbsd has quit IRC
385 2018-05-10T18:19:44  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
386 2018-05-10T18:19:54  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
387 2018-05-10T18:25:42  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
388 2018-05-10T18:27:40  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
389 2018-05-10T18:28:41  *** isis is now known as isis_
390 2018-05-10T18:30:22  *** Krellan has quit IRC
391 2018-05-10T18:30:23  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392 2018-05-10T18:31:59  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
393 2018-05-10T18:35:11  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
394 2018-05-10T18:36:39  *** mistergold has quit IRC
395 2018-05-10T18:40:58  *** dick_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
396 2018-05-10T18:41:15  *** dick_ has quit IRC
397 2018-05-10T18:41:53  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
398 2018-05-10T18:43:52  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
399 2018-05-10T18:46:27  *** Krellan has quit IRC
400 2018-05-10T18:51:53  *** Odin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
401 2018-05-10T18:54:29  <Odin> anybody has a cfw for antminer s5 or s7?
402 2018-05-10T18:56:20  <wumpus> no (but this is probably not the right channel to ask)
403 2018-05-10T18:56:37  <MarcoFalke> Meeting in 3 min?
404 2018-05-10T18:57:48  <wumpus> yes
405 2018-05-10T18:57:56  <MarcoFalke> Proposed topic:  Cache witness hash in CTransaction #13011
406 2018-05-10T18:57:58  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13011 | Cache witness hash in CTransaction by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13011 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
407 2018-05-10T18:59:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
408 2018-05-10T18:59:08  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
409 2018-05-10T18:59:37  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
410 2018-05-10T19:00:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
411 2018-05-10T19:00:27  <wumpus> #startmeeting
412 2018-05-10T19:00:27  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu May 10 19:00:27 2018 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
413 2018-05-10T19:00:27  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
414 2018-05-10T19:00:35  <promag> hi
415 2018-05-10T19:00:39  <jonasschnelli> hi
416 2018-05-10T19:00:42  <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 provoostenator
417 2018-05-10T19:00:50  <provoostenator> Hi
418 2018-05-10T19:00:51  <cfields> hi
419 2018-05-10T19:00:59  <wumpus> proposed topics?
420 2018-05-10T19:01:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
421 2018-05-10T19:01:05  <sipa> ohai
422 2018-05-10T19:01:11  <jimpo> hi
423 2018-05-10T19:01:15  <jcorgan> hey folks
424 2018-05-10T19:01:36  <wumpus> hello
425 2018-05-10T19:01:38  <jimpo> topic proposal: review coordination
426 2018-05-10T19:02:16  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
427 2018-05-10T19:02:19  <wumpus> ok thanks,let's start with the usual
428 2018-05-10T19:02:20  <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
429 2018-05-10T19:02:28  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
430 2018-05-10T19:03:00  <achow101> hi
431 2018-05-10T19:03:03  <wumpus> #10740 #13097 #12979 #12560 #10757
432 2018-05-10T19:03:09  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10740 | [wallet] `loadwallet` RPC - load wallet at runtime by jnewbery · Pull Request #10740 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
433 2018-05-10T19:03:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13097 | ui: Support wallets loaded dynamically by promag · Pull Request #13097 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
434 2018-05-10T19:03:14  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12979 | Split validationinterface into parallel validation/mempool interfaces by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #12979 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
435 2018-05-10T19:03:19  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10757 | RPC: Introduce getblockstats to plot things by jtimon · Pull Request #10757 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
436 2018-05-10T19:03:24  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12560 | [wallet] Upgrade path for non-HD wallets to HD by achow101 · Pull Request #12560 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
437 2018-05-10T19:03:45  <jamesob> hi
438 2018-05-10T19:03:51  <morcos> i'm back
439 2018-05-10T19:03:56  <wumpus> welcome back!
440 2018-05-10T19:04:00  <sipa> hi back, i'm pieter
441 2018-05-10T19:04:09  <morcos> oh man...
442 2018-05-10T19:04:12  <luke-jr> XD
443 2018-05-10T19:04:19  <BlueMatt> mr back?
444 2018-05-10T19:04:56  <wumpus> 10740 should be pretty close to mergeable (but getting unicorns right now)
445 2018-05-10T19:05:18  <jimpo> Can I request #12254 for hi pri?
446 2018-05-10T19:05:22  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12254 | BIP 158: Compact Block Filters for Light Clients by jimpo · Pull Request #12254 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
447 2018-05-10T19:05:54  <BlueMatt> god if this unicorns thing persists we're gonna have to move off github
448 2018-05-10T19:06:17  <BlueMatt> (actually)
449 2018-05-10T19:06:33  <wumpus> jimpo: ye
450 2018-05-10T19:06:52  <jimpo> The GitHub load timeouts seem to be location specific maybe -- have you tried loading over VPN from different places?
451 2018-05-10T19:06:58  <jimpo> Like VPN near GitHub servers?
452 2018-05-10T19:07:04  <promag> yeah imo 10740 is good to go
453 2018-05-10T19:07:19  <BlueMatt> mostly it works if you refresh enough or are logged out, but neither of those is a solution when the refresh count is about 10
454 2018-05-10T19:07:24  <wumpus> no, I haven't tried using a vpn, when I tried tor it didn't help though
455 2018-05-10T19:07:34  <BlueMatt> but we cant use a platform where half the contributors cant load prs
456 2018-05-10T19:07:43  <jimpo> I left some late comments on 10740 yesterday. Biggest one is around the memory leak fix.
457 2018-05-10T19:08:02  <wumpus> usually refreshing helps but sometimes it doesn't for very large PRs with lots of comments
458 2018-05-10T19:08:13  <wumpus> agree github is pretty much useless this way
459 2018-05-10T19:08:25  <promag> jimpo: +1, beside existing comments
460 2018-05-10T19:08:31  <jamesob> everyone knows the emulate-mobile/incognito workaround, right?
461 2018-05-10T19:09:34  <jamesob> (if you don't: use chrome developer tools to emulate a mobile device and problematic PRs should load)
462 2018-05-10T19:10:00  <wumpus> jamesob: thanks
463 2018-05-10T19:10:51  <wumpus> #topic Cache witness hash in CTransaction #13011 (MarcoFalke)
464 2018-05-10T19:10:53  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13011 | Cache witness hash in CTransaction by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13011 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
465 2018-05-10T19:11:01  <MarcoFalke> Background: The witness hash is used for all loose transactions, so caching it would speed up validation (e.g. ATMP and compact block relay). Also, the witness hash is equal to the "normal hash" for transactions without a witness, so there is overhead for rescan/reindex is currently minimal (since there are not many transactions with witness). The gains of caching the witness hash dwarf any overhead during rescan/reindex, imo. And of course, we
466 2018-05-10T19:11:02  <MarcoFalke> can just rework rescan in a future pr.
467 2018-05-10T19:11:39  <MarcoFalke> The code changes are trivial, so at least that shouldn't be an issue
468 2018-05-10T19:12:10  <jamesob> would be nice if that paragraph was in the PR description
469 2018-05-10T19:12:30  <sipa> Downside is that it makes the transactions larger, and hardcodes some validation sprcific logic into the transaction data structure (which for example also affects serving blocks from disks etc)
470 2018-05-10T19:12:53  <BlueMatt> upside is we rectify a significant performance regression
471 2018-05-10T19:12:55  <sipa> So my view is that we should separate the transactions-for-validation tyoe and simple mutable transactions
472 2018-05-10T19:13:08  <BlueMatt> and obviously all pre-segwit-activation blocks will not be served any slower
473 2018-05-10T19:13:10  <MarcoFalke> sipa: I think those can easily be fixed in future prs (I have one open for the blocks serving from disks, and wumpus as well)
474 2018-05-10T19:13:12  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
475 2018-05-10T19:13:26  <sipa> MarcoFalke: i'm aware, not objecting to amything
476 2018-05-10T19:13:28  <BlueMatt> personally, I find it really unacceptable that we have this huge performance regression and arent taking it as something to be fixed asap
477 2018-05-10T19:13:40  <MarcoFalke> sipa: I know, just posting for reference
478 2018-05-10T19:13:41  <sipa> just pointing out that we don't want to do this work everywhere
479 2018-05-10T19:13:52  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
480 2018-05-10T19:13:55  <sipa> so concept ack, if we commit to separating those types
481 2018-05-10T19:14:08  <wumpus> agree with sipa
482 2018-05-10T19:14:13  <BlueMatt> yes, imo we should merge the per as-is now, and then when we look towards MarcoFalke's next pr splitting out the types (which is gonna be a lot more work) we will probably pull out both hashes then anyway
483 2018-05-10T19:14:23  <sipa> there are other reasons for separating those types as well, btw
484 2018-05-10T19:14:30  * BlueMatt would kinda recommending backporting the pr as-is, though
485 2018-05-10T19:14:35  <MarcoFalke> For reference, the "separating those types" is hidden in #13098
486 2018-05-10T19:14:36  <wumpus> let's not make the code a mess to rush ahead
487 2018-05-10T19:14:38  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13098 | Skip tx-rehashing on historic blocks by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13098 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
488 2018-05-10T19:14:40  <BlueMatt> yes, I mean just fixing the txid hashing would be hugely nice
489 2018-05-10T19:14:41  <sipa> such as using more efficient memory representation of scripts without individial mallocs etc
490 2018-05-10T19:14:52  <kanzure> hi.
491 2018-05-10T19:15:27  <wumpus> yes
492 2018-05-10T19:15:37  <cfields> topic suggestion: ^^ one big malloc
493 2018-05-10T19:15:43  <cfields> (when this one's done)
494 2018-05-10T19:15:54  <BlueMatt> wumpus: if anything it makes the code simpler cause the witness and non-witness code is mirrored
495 2018-05-10T19:16:10  <MarcoFalke> Should I put  #13011 in hi priority and for backport?
496 2018-05-10T19:16:12  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13011 | Cache witness hash in CTransaction by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13011 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
497 2018-05-10T19:16:20  <wumpus> BlueMatt: I just don't like confounding all kinds of aspects on the CTransaction object through, it's used in too many places
498 2018-05-10T19:16:36  <BlueMatt> good thing miners dont pay much attention, or they wouldnt be mining segwit txn
499 2018-05-10T19:17:22  <BlueMatt> wumpus: agreed, but point being the txid and wtxid code being symmetric isnt that much of a "mess"
500 2018-05-10T19:17:32  <wumpus> BlueMatt: right...
501 2018-05-10T19:17:37  <BlueMatt> and obviously agree we should be looking into rescan with a non-txid/non-wtxid type
502 2018-05-10T19:17:44  <sipa> fait
503 2018-05-10T19:17:47  <sipa> fair
504 2018-05-10T19:17:51  <BlueMatt> but I have a feeling that is gonna be a lot of work
505 2018-05-10T19:17:59  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
506 2018-05-10T19:18:00  <BlueMatt> or at least take a while review-wise
507 2018-05-10T19:19:09  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: ok added to high priority
508 2018-05-10T19:19:15  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: thx
509 2018-05-10T19:19:27  <MarcoFalke> I will update the OP, as requested by jamesob
510 2018-05-10T19:19:34  <wumpus> not sure about the backport, I think it makes sense to focus on master for performance optimizations
511 2018-05-10T19:19:59  <MarcoFalke> I don't care about the backport, but BlueMatt was asking for it
512 2018-05-10T19:20:12  <BlueMatt> it slows down compact block relay, too, which is mostly why it sucks
513 2018-05-10T19:20:13  <wumpus> unless it's really easy and low risk to backport it
514 2018-05-10T19:20:18  <BlueMatt> otherwise I might care less
515 2018-05-10T19:20:24  <cfields> agree with wumpus. I'm sure the changes are straightforward, but that's still risky for backport
516 2018-05-10T19:20:25  <BlueMatt> the code diff is ~trivial
517 2018-05-10T19:20:37  <morcos> i'm against the backport, but i'm often against backports.  i think they don't get enough review, so they need to be really justified to do them
518 2018-05-10T19:20:48  <wumpus> but normally I'd prefer not to backport things that are not bugfixes, or required to support bugfixes
519 2018-05-10T19:21:11  <MarcoFalke> So let's leave it for now only in master, seems to be the conclusion
520 2018-05-10T19:21:12  <BlueMatt> I do like having more reason for miners to upgrade to 0.16.1
521 2018-05-10T19:21:33  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: yes
522 2018-05-10T19:22:12  <MarcoFalke> Alright, other topics?
523 2018-05-10T19:22:33  <BlueMatt> cfields: had one
524 2018-05-10T19:23:03  <wumpus> #topic one big malloc (cfields)
525 2018-05-10T19:23:24  <sipa> i like working on that, after #13062
526 2018-05-10T19:23:24  <cfields> sipa and I have discussed this briefly, I thought it might be helpful to have a quick discussion here
527 2018-05-10T19:23:27  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13062 | Make script interpreter independent from storage type CScript by sipa · Pull Request #13062 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
528 2018-05-10T19:23:31  <cfields> because there are a few different approaches
529 2018-05-10T19:23:39  <BlueMatt> yea, I think thats the One Big motivation for 13062
530 2018-05-10T19:24:01  <wumpus> one big alloc for the entire process?
531 2018-05-10T19:24:02  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
532 2018-05-10T19:24:02  <cfields> sipa: is your plan to move to Spans inside of CTransaction?
533 2018-05-10T19:24:18  <cfields> with a pool for the script data tacked onto the block somewhere?
534 2018-05-10T19:24:38  <sipa> maybe, there are a lot of possibilities
535 2018-05-10T19:24:39  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
536 2018-05-10T19:24:46  <BlueMatt> without it 13062 makes less sense than just haveing a ScriptSig and ScriptPubKey types
537 2018-05-10T19:24:47  <cfields> wumpus: one malloc for script data per-block
538 2018-05-10T19:24:48  <cfields> or so
539 2018-05-10T19:24:49  <sipa> but 13062 is a prerequisite
540 2018-05-10T19:24:57  <wumpus> 2cf
541 2018-05-10T19:25:03  <wumpus> cfields: ok!
542 2018-05-10T19:25:06  <sipa> (and more; there are a lot.of things that at CScript specific that shouldn't)
543 2018-05-10T19:25:22  <cfields> well another option is std::allocator magic, without having to switch to Span
544 2018-05-10T19:25:30  <wumpus> yes happy to see "span" hapening
545 2018-05-10T19:25:34  <wumpus> noooo
546 2018-05-10T19:25:43  <BlueMatt> heh, that would be a lot less code for similar results........
547 2018-05-10T19:25:47  <wumpus> no magic
548 2018-05-10T19:26:08  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
549 2018-05-10T19:26:12  <BlueMatt> I mean you're gonna have similar levels of magic (with more layer violations) to deserialize a whole block into one pool
550 2018-05-10T19:26:14  <wumpus> yes, but much less easy to understand code
551 2018-05-10T19:26:46  <cfields> wumpus: i can't argue with that, it looks like voodoo
552 2018-05-10T19:27:02  <sipa> damn cool voodoo.
553 2018-05-10T19:27:05  <sipa> but voodoo.
554 2018-05-10T19:27:05  <wumpus> c++ is already too much voodoo
555 2018-05-10T19:27:12  <BlueMatt> true, fuck voodoo
556 2018-05-10T19:27:20  <sipa> let's switch to BASIC
557 2018-05-10T19:27:33  * jonasschnelli ...
558 2018-05-10T19:27:40  <BlueMatt> though absolutely NACK 13062 unless there is demonstrated branch that is realisticly-mergeable that uses it
559 2018-05-10T19:27:41  <cfields> anyway, it got me wondering if it'd be worthwhile to change the p2p format to be more agreeable with allocations
560 2018-05-10T19:27:50  <sipa> BlueMatt: :(
561 2018-05-10T19:27:52  <cfields> (next time we're changing something that is, not for this alone)
562 2018-05-10T19:27:59  <sipa> BlueMatt: i completely disagree :)
563 2018-05-10T19:28:10  * BlueMatt isnt generally a huge fan of making everything a span, its just a ton more complexity
564 2018-05-10T19:28:25  <jonasschnelli> cfields: can you make an example for the p2p allocation issue?
565 2018-05-10T19:28:25  <BlueMatt> and with C++ very easy to fuck up references and have them break
566 2018-05-10T19:28:27  <sipa> not everything will become a span?
567 2018-05-10T19:28:37  <sipa> spans are only used temporarily
568 2018-05-10T19:28:46  <cfields> BlueMatt: how so? Seems absolutely necessary to me if we're ever going to untangle our subsystems
569 2018-05-10T19:28:54  <jonasschnelli> cfields: you mean things like inv size comes before the acctual inv data?
570 2018-05-10T19:28:56  <wumpus> I am a fan of making everything a span, at least for the inner processing, obviously not to keep hold of the data
571 2018-05-10T19:29:01  <BlueMatt> sure, of course, but I see no reason to be moving the script interpreter to a generic Span thing vs using a CScript type unless there is demonstrated use
572 2018-05-10T19:29:03  <sipa> exactly
573 2018-05-10T19:29:05  <cfields> jonasschnelli: right
574 2018-05-10T19:29:12  <sipa> it's abstracting representation from processing
575 2018-05-10T19:29:20  <BlueMatt> why? if its just operating on a CScript, it should just operate on a CScript
576 2018-05-10T19:29:26  <wumpus> I've always found that wedding CScript to a specific backing storage type was a bad idea
577 2018-05-10T19:29:29  <jonasschnelli> Stumbled over this today.
578 2018-05-10T19:29:46  <BlueMatt> I mean you can template it if you want :p
579 2018-05-10T19:29:54  * sipa jumps off bridge
580 2018-05-10T19:30:00  <wumpus> it implies lots of extra allocations and copying
581 2018-05-10T19:30:17  <cfields> BlueMatt: if something is just dumb bytes, why not represent it that way?
582 2018-05-10T19:30:17  <BlueMatt> sipa: that was obviously a joke
583 2018-05-10T19:30:24  <sipa> BlueMatt: so was my jumping :)
584 2018-05-10T19:30:25  <BlueMatt> its not just dumb bytes
585 2018-05-10T19:30:26  <luke-jr> wumpus: enough to actually be an issue?
586 2018-05-10T19:30:36  <sipa> a script is just dumb bytes
587 2018-05-10T19:30:50  <sipa> any sequence of bytes is a valid scriptPubKey at least
588 2018-05-10T19:30:52  <wumpus> right - it's simply a span of bytes
589 2018-05-10T19:31:09  <BlueMatt> yea, I mean ok, sure, dont disagree in principal, but I /really/ hate taking references to things in C++
590 2018-05-10T19:31:20  <sipa> ok
591 2018-05-10T19:31:24  <cfields> also, I love the idea of a MultiSpan for batched operations
592 2018-05-10T19:31:25  <BlueMatt> oops, something realloc'd and now we're executing uninitialized memory
593 2018-05-10T19:31:45  <sipa> BlueMatt: c++ already uses references for ~everything
594 2018-05-10T19:32:08  <BlueMatt> kinda, at least you're taking an iterator and its clear whats going on, introduce a new type and we start passing them around in the script executor and.....
595 2018-05-10T19:32:10  <wumpus> cfields: scatter gather lists?
596 2018-05-10T19:32:24  <BlueMatt> when its Execute(script, script) you know the thing is fine cause you're giving it a reference to the byte storage
597 2018-05-10T19:32:42  <cfields> wumpus: right.
598 2018-05-10T19:32:43  <BlueMatt> not an object that holds a refernece to it that was created sometime in the past
599 2018-05-10T19:32:49  <sipa> and now it will be Execute(Span(script), Span(script))
600 2018-05-10T19:32:51  <BlueMatt> cfields: can we not?
601 2018-05-10T19:32:54  <sipa> same thing.
602 2018-05-10T19:32:59  <cfields> BlueMatt: hmm?
603 2018-05-10T19:33:20  <BlueMatt> no, it'll be push_to_background_thread(Span(script), Span(script))
604 2018-05-10T19:33:30  <sipa> maybe
605 2018-05-10T19:33:40  <BlueMatt> and more layers makes it less easy to see exactly whats going on
606 2018-05-10T19:33:49  <wumpus> you can still copy of spans are the API
607 2018-05-10T19:33:52  <wumpus> it doesn't restrict you in that
608 2018-05-10T19:34:03  <wumpus> it just gives the *option* to use a direct memory buffer
609 2018-05-10T19:34:03  <BlueMatt> hmm?
610 2018-05-10T19:34:06  <sipa> you'd pass script down everything
611 2018-05-10T19:34:14  <wumpus> just copy a vector and make a span to it
612 2018-05-10T19:34:14  <cfields> fwiw, it'd be possible to add an aliasing shared_ptr into Span (or a different SafeSpan maybe) which would keep its owner from deallocating
613 2018-05-10T19:34:16  <sipa> and only when invoking the execution logic you create a span
614 2018-05-10T19:34:18  <BlueMatt> yes, I get it, and I like the option...when we have a user
615 2018-05-10T19:34:22  <cfields> that seems wrong though.
616 2018-05-10T19:34:56  <sipa> anyway, i'd like to start by making scriotSig a different type than scriptPubKey
617 2018-05-10T19:34:59  <BlueMatt> I mean I'm fine with a refactor that doesnt change the exposed interface as step 1
618 2018-05-10T19:35:00  <wumpus> I really don't see why not to do it, but anyhow
619 2018-05-10T19:35:09  <sipa> there are a few more changes to do before that is possible
620 2018-05-10T19:35:16  <BlueMatt> and have a wrapper in executor.cpp that just calls EvalScript(Span(arg1), Span(arg2))
621 2018-05-10T19:35:24  <sipa> as the scriot executiin is not the only thing we do with scripts
622 2018-05-10T19:35:30  <Odin> anybody has a cfw for antminer s5 or s7?
623 2018-05-10T19:35:39  <BlueMatt> also, it'd be nice to have a type check on ScriptSig/ScriptPUbKey types in the public interface :p
624 2018-05-10T19:35:43  <sipa> Odin: not here, go away
625 2018-05-10T19:35:50  <wumpus> Odin: I've replied to this before, go away
626 2018-05-10T19:35:57  *** drexl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
627 2018-05-10T19:36:08  <cfields> BlueMatt: type check?
628 2018-05-10T19:36:19  <Odin> where I can find that, what room you suggest?
629 2018-05-10T19:36:26  <jonasschnelli> Odin: #bitcoin
630 2018-05-10T19:36:26  <BlueMatt> cfields: well if we make scriptpubkey + scriptsig different types, you cant pass them in the wrong order to EvalScript :p
631 2018-05-10T19:36:58  <cfields> ...I'm pretty sure you'd know quickly enough
632 2018-05-10T19:37:01  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
633 2018-05-10T19:37:28  <BlueMatt> the libbitcoinconsensus wrapper in rust was the wrong way around for like 3 months, and had users :p
634 2018-05-10T19:37:36  <BlueMatt> (turns out that mostly just results in it always returning true)
635 2018-05-10T19:37:40  <sipa> "users"
636 2018-05-10T19:38:25  <sipa> anyway, no reason to discuss this further i think
637 2018-05-10T19:38:27  <cfields> completely thread/memory safe though :p
638 2018-05-10T19:38:44  <sipa> there will be reasons that type/execution separation will be useful for
639 2018-05-10T19:38:53  <cfields> agreed, thanks. Just wanted a bit of general discussion around it.
640 2018-05-10T19:39:02  <sipa> (prevector for scriotSig is reaaally bad)
641 2018-05-10T19:40:00  <wumpus> #topic review coordination (jimpo)
642 2018-05-10T19:40:43  <jimpo> so this might just be clarifying what hi pri is
643 2018-05-10T19:40:51  <jimpo> my understanding is it's blockers on longer term things
644 2018-05-10T19:40:58  <jimpo> and mostly more established contributors
645 2018-05-10T19:40:58  <wumpus> that's the intent, yes
646 2018-05-10T19:41:16  <jimpo> I think there's space for another list of things that have been concept ack'ed for people to review
647 2018-05-10T19:41:24  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
648 2018-05-10T19:41:35  <sipa> bitcoinacks.com ? :)
649 2018-05-10T19:41:35  <jimpo> so that no everyone is reviewing different stuff and there's some actual coordination
650 2018-05-10T19:41:47  <jimpo> Yes, bitcoinacks.com is great
651 2018-05-10T19:42:03  <jimpo> I'm curious if people think there should be more of a process around this
652 2018-05-10T19:42:05  <wumpus> the current list is already not working well, I don't really want to add another project
653 2018-05-10T19:42:11  <wumpus> yes bitcoinacks is great
654 2018-05-10T19:42:13  <sipa> but yes, i agree - having a better overview on what is concept acks (anf similarly, encouraging people to concept ack/nack quickly) would be good
655 2018-05-10T19:42:17  <BlueMatt> apparently it doesnt distinguish between nacks and acks
656 2018-05-10T19:42:21  <sipa> ha.
657 2018-05-10T19:42:26  <jonasschnelli> pf.
658 2018-05-10T19:42:39  <wumpus> lol that's an interesting bug
659 2018-05-10T19:42:53  <sipa> "nack" "nack" "nack" "merged!"
660 2018-05-10T19:42:56  <jonasschnelli> who maintains bitcoinacks.com?
661 2018-05-10T19:43:03  <BlueMatt> pierre, apparently
662 2018-05-10T19:43:09  <jonasschnelli> pierre r.?
663 2018-05-10T19:43:12  <jimpo> yeah
664 2018-05-10T19:43:12  <BlueMatt> yes
665 2018-05-10T19:43:36  <jimpo> wumpus: I have thoughts, but why do you say the current list isn't working well?
666 2018-05-10T19:43:42  <jonasschnelli> Lets try to get some feature in. I think an additional layer over github would really help
667 2018-05-10T19:43:59  <BlueMatt> jimpo: it generates very little actual review
668 2018-05-10T19:44:09  <jonasschnelli> jimpo: people do not review it "with high priority"
669 2018-05-10T19:44:25  <jonasschnelli> I think this is also because of the nature of OSS
670 2018-05-10T19:44:25  <wumpus> jimpo: this comes up every meeting, so I don't particularly like to discuss it, but it doesn't attract very much review. Also because the things that end up there tend to be large, complex, hard to review changes.
671 2018-05-10T19:44:42  <jimpo> so does that mean 1) people don't want to review 2) people don't want to review large/hard changes 3) the list isn't actually hi pri?
672 2018-05-10T19:44:51  <wumpus> yes, it's the nature of OSS, people can review or not review whatever they want
673 2018-05-10T19:45:12  <BlueMatt> also reviewing small things is easier, and we've had an influx of small prs over the past 6+ months
674 2018-05-10T19:45:16  <jonasschnelli> People want to review it,.. but maybe have other priorities?
675 2018-05-10T19:45:39  <jimpo> I realize this comes up a lot, but that's because it's a big problem IMO
676 2018-05-10T19:46:02  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: they might just not understand the change well enough
677 2018-05-10T19:46:11  <jimpo> the solution might be just reducing the number of large changes in the hi pri list and prioritizing smaller ones that are more likely to get merged
678 2018-05-10T19:46:14  <promag> jimpo: 4) some require deep understanding 5) usually UI stuff has fewer reviews
679 2018-05-10T19:46:16  <BlueMatt> its not clear there's a solution, the problem is motivation and time to review big changes, and more lists doesnt help with that
680 2018-05-10T19:46:16  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: and that...
681 2018-05-10T19:46:32  <BlueMatt> jimpo: even weeks with fewer entries dont get more review
682 2018-05-10T19:47:12  <jimpo> What if it was a list of 1?
683 2018-05-10T19:47:19  <wumpus> maybe more entries is better -> not everyone is able to review the same things!
684 2018-05-10T19:47:43  <jimpo> wumpus: yeah, true...
685 2018-05-10T19:48:19  <jimpo> My main point is that if everyone is reviewing different stuff because there's no coordination, then reviews go to waste
686 2018-05-10T19:48:20  <wumpus> jimpo: then what? and who decides anyway? the point is now that everyone can have a PR on there that's blocking them, that should foster cooporation
687 2018-05-10T19:48:28  <MarcoFalke> Just as a side note: I try to respect the high priority pull requests when I merge things and avoid merging if they create a merge conflict with one of them
688 2018-05-10T19:50:10  <jimpo> How do other people decide what to review if it's not on the hi pri list?
689 2018-05-10T19:50:14  <wumpus> jimpo: you could ask someone to review your PR and you'd review theirs
690 2018-05-10T19:50:32  <wumpus> depending on what they find interesting or they see as their part of the code
691 2018-05-10T19:50:51  <sipa> jimpo: i generally sort by recently modified
692 2018-05-10T19:51:45  <MarcoFalke> Agree with wumpus, currently the best way to get review is to find contributors in your "area" and trade review with them
693 2018-05-10T19:52:01  <MarcoFalke> And coordinate with them what should go in in what order
694 2018-05-10T19:52:06  <jonasschnelli> jimpo: also, every contributor has its own "roadmap". The high-prio list was usually "one PR per contributor" to "share the roadmap"
695 2018-05-10T19:52:06  <promag> what MarcoFalke said, git blame and ping the guys here
696 2018-05-10T19:52:20  <luke-jr> jimpo: personally, I just browse the PR list
697 2018-05-10T19:52:51  <achow101> I don't do review :/
698 2018-05-10T19:53:06  <wumpus> I tend to pay most attention to bugfixes, RPC changes, GUI and networking things
699 2018-05-10T19:53:11  <promag> achow101: its' great
700 2018-05-10T19:53:17  <jimpo> OK, I don't have much more to say on the topic other than that I think it would be more helpful if there were more clarity around who needs to review what and what should get review.
701 2018-05-10T19:53:43  <wumpus> everything on the PR list needs review
702 2018-05-10T19:53:47  <wumpus> otherwise it should be closed
703 2018-05-10T19:53:50  <wumpus> or merged
704 2018-05-10T19:53:56  <jonasschnelli> jimpo: what do you mean with *needs to review" ?
705 2018-05-10T19:54:01  <jimpo> Personally, I'd just be interested in reviewing whatever needs review, so I try to go through the hi pri list.
706 2018-05-10T19:54:30  <jimpo> Like, if there's a PR and it won't be merged until at least n of this set of loose owners reviews it.
707 2018-05-10T19:54:40  <jimpo> then, eventually they need to weigh in
708 2018-05-10T19:54:43  <wumpus> the point of the PR list is to keep track of what needs review, it's crazy that there's so much on there now, but we can't really help it
709 2018-05-10T19:55:15  <promag> jimpo: IMO you should try to see all PR's
710 2018-05-10T19:55:17  <luke-jr> right, all open PRs need review
711 2018-05-10T19:55:22  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Even a full time reviewer like promag could not bring down the open PR #
712 2018-05-10T19:55:24  <luke-jr> otherwise they wouldn't be open
713 2018-05-10T19:55:32  <wumpus> and as said, it helps to ping people that edited the code before you, they probaly know the code
714 2018-05-10T19:56:14  <BlueMatt> jimpo: I agree, the million-papercut-pr review approach doesnt get us anywhere as a project
715 2018-05-10T19:56:22  <BlueMatt> reviewing things on the highprio list does, at least to me
716 2018-05-10T19:56:27  <jimpo> if the entire PR list is valid and there's limited time for reviews and we are not willing to close stuff quickly, then there's just a fundamental problem
717 2018-05-10T19:56:37  <BlueMatt> I generally try to get through the high prio list once a week, though often fail
718 2018-05-10T19:56:46  <wumpus> a lot of open source projects don't have PR lists at all, for example the freedesktop projects have a mailing list where patches are posted, and the poster of the patch has the responsibility to cc: people that are relevant for review
719 2018-05-10T19:57:05  <wumpus> the 'dump everyone on a list' approach of github doesn't scale that well
720 2018-05-10T19:57:14  <promag> the PR's just sit there waiting for feedback.. sometimes a concept ACK can help push it forward
721 2018-05-10T19:57:16  <jonasschnelli> at least the have no unicorns. :/
722 2018-05-10T19:57:22  <jimpo> well, I'm basically proposing a ranking
723 2018-05-10T19:57:32  <promag> otherwise people keep submitting PR's
724 2018-05-10T19:57:46  <jonasschnelli> Not sure if a "global" ranking is possible.
725 2018-05-10T19:57:46  <promag> who ranks?
726 2018-05-10T19:57:48  <wumpus> jimpo: if you have specific proposals on what to close, feel free to let me know
727 2018-05-10T19:57:51  <jonasschnelli> Because that would assume we have central planing
728 2018-05-10T19:57:58  <promag> ^
729 2018-05-10T19:58:02  <jimpo> # of concept acks is a ranking
730 2018-05-10T19:58:09  <jimpo> which bitcoinacks.com is helpful for
731 2018-05-10T19:58:31  <promag> but if you only see hp then thats biased..
732 2018-05-10T19:59:14  <jonasschnelli> Could one say a concept ACK of sipa has the same "value" as one from John Doe?
733 2018-05-10T19:59:15  *** owowo has quit IRC
734 2018-05-10T19:59:39  <MarcoFalke> That is up to you to decide.
735 2018-05-10T19:59:40  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: people longer in the projects are seen to hae more expertise
736 2018-05-10T19:59:58  <MarcoFalke> Assign a ranking to each Concept ACK :p
737 2018-05-10T20:00:01  <wumpus> if 1000 sybil accounts show up and ack something, we'd obviously not fall for that
738 2018-05-10T20:00:05  <BlueMatt> whatever, I dont think we're making any more progress this week than we have the last 10 times we've discussed this
739 2018-05-10T20:00:12  <jonasschnelli> But I kinda understand jimpo. We should extend bitcoinacks and make it flexible in terms of "getting the ranked list".
740 2018-05-10T20:00:20  <wumpus> I agree, this is too meta of a topic, it's not constructive
741 2018-05-10T20:00:24  <wumpus> #endmeeting
742 2018-05-10T20:00:24  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu May 10 20:00:24 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
743 2018-05-10T20:00:24  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-10-19.00.html
744 2018-05-10T20:00:24  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-10-19.00.txt
745 2018-05-10T20:00:24  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-10-19.00.log.html
746 2018-05-10T20:00:27  <promag> I've seen some projects where PR's just automatically close after some inactivity.. then the author can reopen
747 2018-05-10T20:00:55  <jonasschnelli> Yes. We do that manually...
748 2018-05-10T20:01:00  <jonasschnelli> But should probably do that more often
749 2018-05-10T20:01:16  <wumpus> again, if there's anything you think that should be closed, let me know and I'll look at it
750 2018-05-10T20:01:22  <promag> we have 267 open PR's..
751 2018-05-10T20:01:27  <wumpus> I don't have the time nor energy to keep on top of the PR list, if that was even humanly possible
752 2018-05-10T20:01:33  <promag> and counting
753 2018-05-10T20:01:45  <BlueMatt> wumpus: I dont think it has been for at least 6 months :/
754 2018-05-10T20:01:59  <luke-jr> maybe auto-close after a week of needing rebase?
755 2018-05-10T20:02:02  <wumpus> BlueMatt: right
756 2018-05-10T20:02:04  <MarcoFalke> Is there a way to block people from creating pull requests if they have too many outstanding ones?
757 2018-05-10T20:02:10  <luke-jr> problem is GitHub doesn't let authors reopen..
758 2018-05-10T20:02:13  <MarcoFalke> I guess  that'd be helpful
759 2018-05-10T20:02:34  <promag> luke-jr: oh
760 2018-05-10T20:02:38  <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: "you can't work because others aren't"? :P
761 2018-05-10T20:02:45  <MarcoFalke> And then a note saying "Please trade review"
762 2018-05-10T20:03:17  <promag> but that's also unfair, I think that closing should happen because of nacks
763 2018-05-10T20:03:27  <skeees> RCO - review coin?
764 2018-05-10T20:03:37  <luke-jr> skeees: I was thinking about joking that..
765 2018-05-10T20:03:39  <jonasschnelli> heh... do an ICO, quick!
766 2018-05-10T20:03:55  <luke-jr> it might be helpful if users had an easy way to put bounties on review of PRs they like
767 2018-05-10T20:03:56  <wumpus> promag: ideally, yes, though if no one is interested in a change, it'd make sense to close it too
768 2018-05-10T20:04:19  <wumpus> promag: I usually close my own PRs after a while if they don't get review or discussion, but many other people are not doing that
769 2018-05-10T20:04:37  <luke-jr> of course, then we might get the problem of false reviews to collect it :/
770 2018-05-10T20:04:39  <promag> wumpus: yeah I also want to close some of mines
771 2018-05-10T20:04:54  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
772 2018-05-10T20:05:24  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag closed pull request #11515: Assert cs_main is held when retrieving node state (master...201710-node-state-guard) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11515
773 2018-05-10T20:05:47  <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: Then you stop trading reviews with that person ;)
774 2018-05-10T20:06:10  <luke-jr> as soon as I get a chance, I'm hoping to go through mine and rebase/close as appropriate
775 2018-05-10T20:06:15  <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: how do you even detect it?
776 2018-05-10T20:06:34  <wumpus> I don't think we have to be so afraid of fake reviews by serious devs
777 2018-05-10T20:06:34  <promag> wumpus: I still think an explicit ack/nack is better than "timeout"
778 2018-05-10T20:06:48  <wumpus> promag: I also think so, but it's not always what you can hope for
779 2018-05-10T20:07:08  <luke-jr> wumpus: no, just fake reviews from newbie devs after users put a bounty on it
780 2018-05-10T20:07:47  <wumpus> promag: in open source it's sometimes necessary to be somewhat pushy with changes, promote them, and if still no one is interested well that's it, at some point it makes no sense to keep working on it
781 2018-05-10T20:07:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12935: Add ProcessOrphans (move-only) (master...Mf1804-ProcessOrphans) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12935
782 2018-05-10T20:08:13  <promag> wumpus: yeah I usually beg for merge right? :P
783 2018-05-10T20:08:32  <wumpus> promag: it's easier to get attention for changes that are end-user visible
784 2018-05-10T20:08:49  <wumpus> e.g. someone really wants a certain RPC call and is willing to test it
785 2018-05-10T20:09:19  <wumpus> optimizations also tend to attract review quickly
786 2018-05-10T20:09:36  <luke-jr> I wonder if it would be helpful or harmful to encourage non-devs to test stuff more
787 2018-05-10T20:09:37  <wumpus> unless the code changes are very complex and big
788 2018-05-10T20:10:27  <wumpus> luke-jr: we usually do that, for GUI changes
789 2018-05-10T20:10:38  <BlueMatt> I mean part of my goal with high-prio was "everyone gets to make some progress on one of their pr's once a week", but it seems no one else wanted to use it that way, and that's fine, but unless people have new suggestiotns, its not worth discussing these things anymore, I think
790 2018-05-10T20:10:43  <BlueMatt> maybe we should have a rule against them at meeting
791 2018-05-10T20:10:45  <wumpus> but GUI changes are, everything considered, already easy to get merged
792 2018-05-10T20:11:21  <promag> wumpus: for instance #12578
793 2018-05-10T20:11:23  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12578 | Add transaction record type Fee by promag · Pull Request #12578 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
794 2018-05-10T20:11:52  <promag> should be merged or closed?
795 2018-05-10T20:12:06  <wumpus> (test changes are also, usually, either quickly merged or quickly rejected)
796 2018-05-10T20:12:34  <wumpus> promag: for that it makes a lot of sense to let some non-dev users test
797 2018-05-10T20:12:45  <wumpus> promag: whether the new transaction list format is desirable/useful
798 2018-05-10T20:13:15  <wumpus> promag: maybe jonasschnelli can do a build there
799 2018-05-10T20:13:40  <promag> some non-dev users test <- rarely seen right?
800 2018-05-10T20:13:47  <wumpus> BlueMatt: I agree
801 2018-05-10T20:13:57  <wumpus> promag: well try to find someone that is interested in your change!
802 2018-05-10T20:14:31  <MarcoFalke> Right, GUI changes also need testing from GUI users.
803 2018-05-10T20:14:40  <luke-jr> promag: well, lots of PRs get into Knots, so it could be a matter of getting those users to report on their issues or lack thereof
804 2018-05-10T20:14:53  <wumpus> promag: I"m sure you can find people to at least discuss about whether this change is desirable or not?
805 2018-05-10T20:15:19  <wumpus> promag: it's not some obscure checkbox that moves somewhere else, but the layout of the transaction list, people will care about this
806 2018-05-10T20:17:25  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
807 2018-05-10T20:18:20  <promag> wumpus: well I don't really care about that, I just think it makes sense but I also can close it..
808 2018-05-10T20:19:09  <wumpus> I mean you could ask on reddit, or twitter, or whereever GUI users are, I think the problem on github is that no one really has much opinion on the GUI as long as it keeps working :-)
809 2018-05-10T20:20:28  <MarcoFalke> On firefox the mobile mode is on CTRL+SHIFT+M
810 2018-05-10T20:20:38  <MarcoFalke> You can set a custom device
811 2018-05-10T20:20:44  <MarcoFalke> Or just modify the UA
812 2018-05-10T20:20:50  <wumpus> promag: I've concept ACK'ed it FWIW
813 2018-05-10T20:21:08  <luke-jr> wumpus: I use and have an opinion that it's dumb to have 2 lines for every tx :P
814 2018-05-10T20:21:35  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
815 2018-05-10T20:21:41  <wumpus> luke-jr: you did concept ACK it, maybe retract that then?
816 2018-05-10T20:22:38  <luke-jr> Well, it makes sense for sendmanys
817 2018-05-10T20:24:06  <wumpus> wouldn't expanding the fee only for sendmanys be inconsistent?
818 2018-05-10T20:24:22  <promag> luke-jr: you think the fee should be "associated" to the destinatino?
819 2018-05-10T20:24:38  <luke-jr> promag: not really
820 2018-05-10T20:24:45  <wumpus> I mean it might seem silly but there's certainly some precedent in billing to have separate rows for fees
821 2018-05-10T20:25:20  <luke-jr> Maybe a checkbox to show/hide fees or something would make sense
822 2018-05-10T20:25:38  <promag> right, what I think could work well is to aggregate the fee outside the table
823 2018-05-10T20:25:44  <luke-jr> or even just an extra column
824 2018-05-10T20:25:49  <wumpus> then again I don't care so deeply I really want to argue either for or against this
825 2018-05-10T20:26:08  <promag> luke-jr: with extra column and multisend, which row you put the fee?
826 2018-05-10T20:26:16  <luke-jr> (for tax purposes, I found I have to use JSON-RPC to get useful data)
827 2018-05-10T20:26:22  <wumpus> would vote against adding extra columns
828 2018-05-10T20:28:28  <promag> anyway, a clear case of lack of feedback
829 2018-05-10T20:29:28  <luke-jr> I suppose bank statements do show fees separately - they're just uncommon in general
830 2018-05-10T20:29:38  *** moneyball has quit IRC
831 2018-05-10T20:29:44  <promag> luke-jr: right
832 2018-05-10T20:29:57  <promag> but my point is consistency with listransactions
833 2018-05-10T20:30:32  <promag> amounts are different
834 2018-05-10T20:30:44  <luke-jr> listtransactions doesn't have separate rows for fees
835 2018-05-10T20:32:03  <promag> right, but it doesn't sum amount and fee
836 2018-05-10T20:32:06  <Odin> what it's the best pool for btc, not slush, prohashing or antpool
837 2018-05-10T20:32:14  <promag> bye Odin
838 2018-05-10T20:33:04  *** Odin has left #bitcoin-core-dev
839 2018-05-10T20:33:20  <luke-jr> if we want to imitate listtransactions, that would suggest an extra column (which wumpus doesn't like)
840 2018-05-10T20:33:26  <luke-jr> wumpus: what if it was hidden by default?
841 2018-05-10T20:33:48  <wumpus> there are already so many columns, I think adding more would be against user friendly UI design, then again I don't have a dog in that fight
842 2018-05-10T20:34:06  <wumpus> sure, you could do optional columns
843 2018-05-10T20:37:18  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
844 2018-05-10T20:39:12  *** Randolf has quit IRC
845 2018-05-10T20:41:05  <luke-jr> how about an option? "Show fees: Not at all; As an extra column; Included in amount"
846 2018-05-10T20:41:22  <luke-jr> hopefully it will become obvious which of the latter two is preferred with time
847 2018-05-10T20:48:06  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
848 2018-05-10T20:48:48  <wumpus> making everything an option because we just can't decide :)
849 2018-05-10T20:49:14  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
850 2018-05-10T20:51:49  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
851 2018-05-10T20:52:06  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
852 2018-05-10T20:54:00  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
853 2018-05-10T20:54:33  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
854 2018-05-10T20:56:22  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
855 2018-05-10T20:56:32  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
856 2018-05-10T20:58:29  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
857 2018-05-10T20:59:00  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
858 2018-05-10T21:00:44  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
859 2018-05-10T21:11:54  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
860 2018-05-10T21:12:11  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
861 2018-05-10T21:14:31  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
862 2018-05-10T21:17:12  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
863 2018-05-10T21:17:29  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
864 2018-05-10T21:19:24  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
865 2018-05-10T21:20:03  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
866 2018-05-10T21:20:58  *** Randolf has quit IRC
867 2018-05-10T21:22:47  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
868 2018-05-10T21:23:54  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
869 2018-05-10T21:25:16  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
870 2018-05-10T21:29:36  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
871 2018-05-10T21:30:48  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
872 2018-05-10T21:31:05  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
873 2018-05-10T21:32:09  *** promag has quit IRC
874 2018-05-10T21:33:59  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
875 2018-05-10T21:34:16  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
876 2018-05-10T21:38:11  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
877 2018-05-10T21:38:40  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
878 2018-05-10T21:40:36  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
879 2018-05-10T21:40:54  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
880 2018-05-10T21:43:58  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
881 2018-05-10T21:44:15  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
882 2018-05-10T21:48:10  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
883 2018-05-10T21:48:39  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
884 2018-05-10T21:51:33  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
885 2018-05-10T21:51:50  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
886 2018-05-10T21:55:45  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
887 2018-05-10T21:56:22  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
888 2018-05-10T21:59:17  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
889 2018-05-10T21:59:46  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
890 2018-05-10T22:02:40  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
891 2018-05-10T22:03:07  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
892 2018-05-10T22:03:45  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
893 2018-05-10T22:06:01  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
894 2018-05-10T22:06:18  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
895 2018-05-10T22:07:57  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
896 2018-05-10T22:08:47  *** Krellan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
897 2018-05-10T22:09:24  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
898 2018-05-10T22:11:13  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
899 2018-05-10T22:11:30  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
900 2018-05-10T22:11:54  *** Krellan has quit IRC
901 2018-05-10T22:13:01  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1c582503507b...cb9bbf77726a
902 2018-05-10T22:13:01  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5d53661 John Newbery: [tests] Remove 'account' API from wallet functional tests...
903 2018-05-10T22:13:02  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cb9bbf7 MarcoFalke: Merge #13075: [tests] Remove 'account' API from wallet functional tests...
904 2018-05-10T22:13:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13075: [tests] Remove 'account' API from wallet functional tests (master...remove_functional_tests_accounts) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13075
905 2018-05-10T22:14:57  *** drexl has quit IRC
906 2018-05-10T22:19:08  *** Krellan_ has quit IRC
907 2018-05-10T22:20:25  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
908 2018-05-10T22:20:42  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
909 2018-05-10T22:21:51  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
910 2018-05-10T22:25:36  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
911 2018-05-10T22:25:53  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
912 2018-05-10T22:27:50  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
913 2018-05-10T22:28:07  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
914 2018-05-10T22:29:01  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
915 2018-05-10T22:31:02  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
916 2018-05-10T22:31:39  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
917 2018-05-10T22:33:33  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
918 2018-05-10T22:33:37  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
919 2018-05-10T22:33:50  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
920 2018-05-10T22:37:45  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
921 2018-05-10T22:38:19  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
922 2018-05-10T22:40:29  *** dx25 has quit IRC
923 2018-05-10T22:41:24  *** dx25 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
924 2018-05-10T22:41:51  *** User__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
925 2018-05-10T22:42:40  *** ken2812221 has quit IRC
926 2018-05-10T22:42:55  *** Squidicc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
927 2018-05-10T22:44:23  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
928 2018-05-10T22:44:28  *** Squidicuz has quit IRC
929 2018-05-10T22:44:41  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
930 2018-05-10T22:45:33  *** User__ has quit IRC
931 2018-05-10T22:45:56  *** ken2812221 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
932 2018-05-10T22:48:40  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
933 2018-05-10T22:50:11  *** Randolf has quit IRC
934 2018-05-10T22:51:11  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
935 2018-05-10T22:51:27  *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
936 2018-05-10T22:52:11  *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
937 2018-05-10T22:52:35  *** gmaxwell is now known as Guest44828
938 2018-05-10T22:53:44  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
939 2018-05-10T22:54:31  *** spinza has quit IRC
940 2018-05-10T22:55:57  *** Randolf has quit IRC
941 2018-05-10T22:58:09  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
942 2018-05-10T23:03:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
943 2018-05-10T23:04:13  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
944 2018-05-10T23:08:36  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
945 2018-05-10T23:09:41  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
946 2018-05-10T23:11:58  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
947 2018-05-10T23:12:15  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
948 2018-05-10T23:15:11  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
949 2018-05-10T23:15:28  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
950 2018-05-10T23:15:58  *** cryptojanitor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
951 2018-05-10T23:19:32  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
952 2018-05-10T23:19:49  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
953 2018-05-10T23:22:43  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
954 2018-05-10T23:23:33  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
955 2018-05-10T23:27:09  *** zautomata has quit IRC
956 2018-05-10T23:28:28  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
957 2018-05-10T23:28:45  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
958 2018-05-10T23:30:41  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
959 2018-05-10T23:31:07  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
960 2018-05-10T23:34:01  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
961 2018-05-10T23:34:18  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962 2018-05-10T23:35:18  *** Randolf has quit IRC
963 2018-05-10T23:35:55  *** Krellan has quit IRC
964 2018-05-10T23:37:41  *** honeybadgerdgaf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
965 2018-05-10T23:42:58  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
966 2018-05-10T23:43:24  *** promag has quit IRC
967 2018-05-10T23:45:13  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
968 2018-05-10T23:45:30  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
969 2018-05-10T23:47:34  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
970 2018-05-10T23:48:31  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
971 2018-05-10T23:50:24  *** arowser_ has quit IRC
972 2018-05-10T23:50:35  *** zautomata has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
973 2018-05-10T23:51:24  *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
974 2018-05-10T23:53:01  *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
975 2018-05-10T23:55:27  *** glaksmono has quit IRC
976 2018-05-10T23:57:20  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
977 2018-05-10T23:57:31  *** honeybadgerdgaf has quit IRC
978 2018-05-10T23:59:08  *** honeybadgerdgaf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev