19:01:30 <wumpus> #startmeeting
19:01:30 <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Jul 26 19:01:30 2018 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:01:30 <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
19:01:35 <jnewbery> hi
19:01:38 <achow101> hi
19:01:39 <jamesob> hi
19:01:39 <nmnkgl> hi
19:01:44 <jonasschnelli> hi
19:01:45 <provoostenator> hi
19:01:46 <sipa> hi
19:01:59 <cfields> hi
19:02:04 <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark mi
19:02:08 <wumpus> chagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator
19:02:18 <kanzure> hi.
19:02:32 <BlueMatt> I have a somewhat strange topic: what to call the witness version of the p2sh redeemScript...not quite the right venue to discuss it, but there's not a much better one and we have to pick something for bitcoincore.org, sooooo
19:02:56 <wumpus> #topic naming of witness version of the p2sh redeemScript
19:02:59 <achow101> hasn't this been called "witnessScript" for a while?
19:03:04 <sipa> yes
19:03:21 <achow101> that's what i have used for bip 174 at least
19:03:31 <BlueMatt> I had never seen that
19:03:34 <BlueMatt> though I admit it was in the BIP
19:03:42 <BlueMatt> and I know people who've called it the witness redeem script or so
19:03:51 <BlueMatt> which is also confusing cause of p2sh-wrapped segwit
19:04:02 <BlueMatt> but witnessScript is confusing given scriptWitness refers to the whole witness :(
19:04:03 <jonasschnelli> how is this important to define?
19:04:06 <BlueMatt> so every option is shit
19:04:18 <sipa> perhaps it should be called P2WSH redeemscript, as it's arguably specific to P2WSH (P2WPKH doesn't have it, and future witness versions may not either)
19:04:19 <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: well we need to call it *something* and it seems everyone has a different one
19:04:45 <kanzure> using ambiguous jargon will cause errors and bugs
19:05:01 <sipa> BlueMatt: scriptWitness is just in bitcoin core's source code though; is it called that way anywhere else?
19:05:17 <BlueMatt> sipa: I'm not sure that it is, but that was MarcoFalke's comment to me
19:05:20 <jonasschnelli> IMO it's specified in the BIP, but people are free to form a new term. I don't think there is need to an authoriity to define it.
19:05:45 <BlueMatt> but, given the witness can be seen as a "scriptSig replacement" calling it that I could see being incredibly confusing to some people
19:06:07 <sipa> yes, i agree it's confusing and we could have picked a better name
19:06:17 <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: well I ask because there is debate about what to write in some docs in rust-bitcoin, and also what to call it on bitcoincore.org docs
19:06:18 <sipa> the cat may also already be out of the bag since 2 years ago
19:06:27 <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: so this is the right venue to discuss bitcoincore.org
19:06:38 <BlueMatt> sipa: sure, but I've seen it referred to as other things too already :(
19:06:45 <promag> hi
19:06:53 <gmaxwell> I think this discussion is a waste of time for this venue.
19:06:55 <provoostenator> For now, maybe just explain that it's confusing and someone should propose a BIP to deconfuse it?
19:06:55 <kanzure> cfields: are the poll results due today?
19:07:22 <jonasschnelli> Can we also rename "wallet"? *duck*
19:07:32 <cfields> kanzure: ah, thanks for the reminder. poll closed at the end of yesterday's meeting. winner: current time
19:07:46 <cfields> er, last week's meeting
19:07:54 <wumpus> #topic meeting time
19:08:08 <provoostenator> Even just pointing out that something_is_ confusing, helps the reader pay attention, otherwise they might think they just don't get it.
19:08:26 <cfields> poll results: https://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_a80f9a69d20aab2a
19:08:37 <kanzure> cfields: is that a selection effect of mostly current-meeting participants answering the survey?
19:09:10 <provoostenator> So was the idea still to alternate between two times?
19:09:15 <cfields> kanzure: possibly, but I'm not sure how else to get the word out.
19:09:29 <gmaxwell> cfields: what was the runner up time?
19:09:49 <cfields> gmaxwell: see link above
19:09:49 <sipa> gmaxwell: one hour earlier
19:10:01 <gmaxwell> oh sorry.
19:11:32 <promag> quick question, when 0.17 branch?
19:11:48 <achow101> promag: August 1st or so
19:11:55 <wumpus> #12624
19:11:57 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12624 | Release schedule for 0.17.0 · Issue #12624 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
19:12:06 <achow101> according to the release schedule
19:12:14 <wumpus> 2018-08-13
19:12:18 <wumpus> is the plan
19:12:31 <sipa> also w.r.t. scantxoutset, are we going to mark it experimental?
19:12:47 <wumpus> I think everyone agreed on that
19:13:00 <jonasschnelli> Yes. I can PR that.
19:13:00 <promag> +1
19:13:11 <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: thanks.
19:13:28 <jonasschnelli> Sorry for the delayed review on sipas descriptor work... will comment soon on the PR
19:15:20 <wumpus> #topic 0.16.2 final
19:15:28 <BlueMatt> ack
19:15:37 <wumpus> rc2 was tagged ~a week ago, I don't think any issues came up
19:15:42 <gmaxwell> I haven't seen or heard any issues with the RC.
19:15:51 <wumpus> so I think it's time to tag final
19:15:55 <jonasschnelli> agree
19:15:58 <cfields> +1
19:16:15 <wumpus> ok, will do so after the meeting
19:16:20 <gmaxwell> not have any OMG-must-fix-now bugs cropped up that I'm aware of.
19:16:21 <promag> +1
19:16:23 <achow101> yay
19:16:41 <wumpus> any other topics?
19:17:11 <cfields> quick personal announcement: A small health issue has been taking up a good amount of my time lately, and I've been struggling to keep up with review, let alone writing new code. I've decided to take a week or two to try to finish up outstanding things, then take a month away to try to get back to 100%. I'll try to at least keep up with emails and pings during that time.
19:17:35 <wumpus> as for high priority for review, please review everything under the 0.17 milestone: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/33
19:17:44 <kanzure> cfields: good luck with your health.
19:17:46 <sipa> cfields: take all the time you need
19:17:46 <jamesob> rest up, cfields!
19:17:48 <cfields> so if I owe anyone review on something, please give me a ping!
19:17:49 <jonasschnelli> sad to hear and hope you will recover soon cfields!
19:17:50 <gmaxwell> #13756 might want to have some coordination on the UI/GUI side. (or someone to come yell at me to not creep the scope)
19:17:51 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13756 | wallet: -avoidreuse feature for improved privacy by kallewoof · Pull Request #13756 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
19:18:24 <wumpus> cfields: yes, just take the rest you need
19:18:33 <provoostenator> gmaxwell I'll try that one.
19:19:07 <jonasschnelli> thanks provoostenator
19:19:09 <promag> re 13756, I have some too
19:19:13 <cfields> thanks, all, but ping away.
19:19:14 <promag> *questions :/
19:20:34 <wumpus> is kallewoof there to answer them?
19:20:47 <wumpus> if not, I don't think it makes sense to ask them during the meeting
19:20:51 <sipa> it's 4:20 AM for him
19:20:58 <promag> sure, in I'll do in gh
19:20:58 <wumpus> right
19:21:10 <wumpus> ok
19:22:12 <gmaxwell> I brought it up in part because kallewoof doesn't make meetings. :)
19:22:41 <jonasschnelli> JP timezone I guess
19:23:00 <wumpus> the PR missed the feature freeze so there's not that much hurry
19:24:03 <wumpus> any other topics?
19:24:43 <luke-jr> steak?
19:25:21 <jamesob> did we decide to stop maintaining/pushing a high-prio PR list?
19:25:25 <wumpus> steak!
19:25:35 <midnightmagic> +1 steak
19:25:37 <sipa> jamesob: it's just overshadowed now by the 0.17 milestone
19:25:44 <wumpus> jamesob: < wumpus> as for high priority for review, please review everything under the 0.17 milestone: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/33
19:25:53 <jamesob> oops, thanks
19:26:00 <gmaxwell> because we're near 0.17, its the 0.17 list that is high prio right now.
19:26:18 <wumpus> maintainging a separate high priority list is just confusing at the moment, I think
19:27:14 <promag> agree, 0.17 is high priority
19:29:04 <wumpus> any other 0.17 PR s that need to be discussed?
19:29:48 <ken2812221> #13426
19:29:50 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13426 | [bugfix] Fix encoding issue for Windows by ken2812221 · Pull Request #13426 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
19:30:08 <ken2812221> Is it allowable to add wmain function?
19:30:25 <wumpus> #topic encoding issue on windows (ken2812221(
19:31:17 <cfields> there are a bunch of current PRs for depends and gitian descriptors. I assume it's no problem to continue working on those for 0.17? There are a few fixes that may be non-trivial that I would greatly prefer over the one-liner fixes.
19:31:34 <wumpus> ken2812221: I'd prefer not, I think we had multiple entry points at some point, with special one for windows but this was cleaned up to just main(), if there is really no other way
19:31:56 <gmaxwell> i hate strings
19:32:21 <wumpus> so do I, but unfortunately they're needed for path names
19:32:31 <cfields> windows strings cause 2x developer hate :(
19:32:46 <luke-jr> they string us along?
19:32:58 <gmaxwell> so the issue here is that windows APIs want UTF16 strings or something?
19:32:59 <cfields> luke-jr: i would characterize it that way, hes
19:33:13 <wumpus> gmaxwell: yes :-/
19:33:18 <ken2812221> Windows does not use utf8
19:33:26 <gmaxwell> I'm vaguely aware of that.
19:33:39 <wumpus> I think #13426 is too big a change
19:33:42 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13426 | [bugfix] Fix encoding issue for Windows by ken2812221 · Pull Request #13426 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
19:33:57 <gmaxwell> Originally it was UCS2 but then they realized that chinese exists and it became UTF16 to get the worst of all worlds or soemthing like that.
19:34:27 <wumpus> is this reallky all necessary? it changes pretty much all uses of paths in the code
19:34:35 <sipa> yeah, they adopted unicode very early, and picked a different encoding than what the rest of the world eventually ended up pickin
19:35:23 <gmaxwell> ken2812221: what keeps you from intercepting a couple places at a low level and inserting at UTF8->UTF16 conversion?
19:35:39 <wumpus> I hate waltzing over the entire code to accomodate windows' crappyness
19:36:08 <ken2812221> The command line argument, I think.
19:36:35 <wumpus> most of the changes seem .string() versus .u8string()
19:36:51 <gmaxwell> ken2812221: the commandline arguments come in as utf8 strings, right?
19:37:12 <ken2812221> no, it is ANSI or UTF-16.
19:37:19 <wumpus> on POSIX platforms that's what we assume, in windows they come as utf16 strings
19:37:23 <ken2812221> on Windows
19:38:05 <sipa> since windows 10 apparently you can select a codepage for the "ansi" encoding that is utf8
19:38:14 <wumpus> sipa: oh!
19:38:24 <sipa> oh no
19:38:30 <gmaxwell> wumpus: so how do we deal with like ua comment coming in and not sticking UTF16 into our network messages?
19:38:40 <sipa> only possible since windows 10 insider build 17035 (November 2017)
19:38:47 <cfields> gmaxwell: we sanitize those
19:39:17 <gmaxwell> cfields: but given UTF16 wouldn't our sanitizer just corrupt the string? (throw out all characters?)
19:39:28 <cfields> (unsure what gets lost in the conversion, but we know what can't go out)
19:39:29 <wumpus> gmaxwell: it needs to be converted to UTF8 for the internal use
19:39:37 <gmaxwell> okay, I clearly know nothing here so I should probably just go read.
19:39:47 <wumpus> so the arguments come in as UTF-16, then are converted to UTF-8 for storage
19:39:55 <gmaxwell> wumpus: right I guess I was just assuming the argument processing conerted it all to utf8 before we saw any of it.
19:39:59 <wumpus> which makes complete sense in ken2812221 's PR
19:40:02 <cfields> gmaxwell: nah, I think you're right. I was just making the point that it at least won't go over the wire that way.
19:40:13 <sipa> ok, 17035 was finally released as "April 2018 update"
19:40:21 <sipa> that's... a decade too late
19:40:28 <wumpus> sipa: yes...
19:40:41 <gmaxwell> In which case I'd assume the path issue could be solved by wrapping the file IO with something that converts our internal utf8 to utf16 for windows.
19:40:42 <luke-jr> XD
19:40:49 <wumpus> though microsoft is twisting people's arms really hard to upgrade to windows 10
19:40:59 <sipa> don't we already have the fs space for that?
19:41:07 <wumpus> yes, that's what his PR does
19:41:22 <sipa> hmm, i would expect it's just changing one or two functions
19:41:26 <gmaxwell> ^
19:41:40 <sipa> sorry, i'm not very familiar with this part of the code; i should probably go look
19:41:45 <wumpus> it makes sense, the only thing is dislike is the size of the diff because he uses .u8string instead of .string in so many places, but it's fairly simple
19:43:03 <ken2812221> There are some TODO: leveldb and fstream
19:43:07 <wumpus> should probably get over it and review it...
19:43:25 <ken2812221> They are not support utf-8 in this PR.
19:44:03 <wumpus> so that will still fail with datadirs with, say, Chinese characters in it?
19:44:45 <ken2812221> Yes, still fail, but success if you set your setting to Chinese.
19:44:58 <ken2812221> Before this PR, both fail.
19:45:55 <wumpus> okay, that's good
19:46:33 <ken2812221> Thanks
19:47:51 <jtimon> I guess #13311 doesn't deserve to be in the 0.17.0 milestone since it is not a feature nor a bugfix
19:47:53 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13311 | Dont edit Chainparams after initialization by jtimon · Pull Request #13311 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHubAsset 1Asset 1
19:52:03 <wumpus> it's not really about 'deserve', I don't see a point to add it to the milestone, but if it is ready for merge before branching off 0.17 it can make it into 0.17
19:53:01 <jtimon> sure, perhaps not the right word, "I guess there's no point for in to be in the milestone"
19:53:47 <wumpus> yes, I agree with that
19:54:04 <jtimon> I guess I was just review begging by mentioning it, sorry
19:54:11 <wumpus> that's okay
19:56:13 <wumpus> I guess we're out of topics
19:56:16 <wumpus> #endmeeting