19:00:09 #startmeeting 19:00:09 Meeting started Fri Jun 19 19:00:09 2020 UTC. The chair is meshcollider. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:00:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 19:00:10 wallet meeting? 19:00:12 hi 19:00:12 hi 19:00:16 #bitcoin-core-dev Wallet Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator aj Chris_Stewart_5 dongcarl gwillen jamesob ken281221 ryanofsky gleb moneyball ariard digi_james amiti fjahr 19:00:16 jeremyrubin emilengler jonatack hebasto jb55 19:00:33 Glad you can see my messages this week 19:00:42 Topics? 19:00:47 luke-jr: had one 19:01:36 Plug for for my hardware wallet write-up: https://gist.github.com/Sjors/29d06728c685e6182828c1ce9b74483d 19:02:01 Nothing new to report though. 19:02:03 [06-17 03:15:04 pm] #proposedwalletmeetingtopic revert #6550 (conceptually) - merkle branches stored in the wallet would be useful for pruned nodes [w/ watch-only wallets] 19:02:07 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6550 | Do not store Merkle branches in the wallet. by sipa · Pull Request #6550 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 19:03:40 Is luke-jr here though 19:03:50 provoostenator: nice write-up 19:04:03 To many double negatives, so the proposal is to store Merkle branches in the wallet? 19:04:36 yes 19:04:41 at least optionally 19:04:56 hi 19:04:56 also we should probably remove the descriptor wallets project from the repo now that it's done. maybe we should add one for hwardware wallets and one for sqlite wallets? 19:05:03 but probably better to have this discussion with luke-jr present 19:05:09 Is that to make it easier to do transaction lookups without a txindex? 19:05:41 But yes, we can defer discussion until he's around. 19:05:59 achow101: sounds sensible, I'm not sure I can add/remove projects so maybe sipa can do that for us :) 19:07:03 So tl;dr for the hardware wallet write-up for now is: go and review #11413 ? 19:07:06 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11413 | [wallet] [rpc] sendtoaddress/sendmany: Add explicit feerate option by kallewoof · Pull Request #11413 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 19:07:13 Hardware wallet project would be welcome. My writeup contains a few PR's that can be added, recursion should find the rest, or pingme. 19:07:47 meshcollider: there's roughly two things one can review, based on interest 19:07:56 1) bunch of send RPC related PR's 19:08:18 2) runCommandParseJSON (which adds boost::process) 19:08:58 But you're right, 11413 has been stuck in limbo for a long time, we should get it in 19:09:38 +1 will review 11413 19:09:52 Yes, because that introduces sat/b which I'll need in any other RPC call related to sending coins 19:10:10 (or waste more of kallewoof's time if he needs to rebase) 19:10:53 But I'd love to get #15382 in as well, hopefully the opt-in behavior now is acceptable. 19:10:57 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15382 | util: add runCommandParseJSON by Sjors · Pull Request #15382 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 19:11:13 configure.ac is rather painful to work on 19:11:15 #18027 is getting close too. I'm reviewing it right now 19:11:18 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18027 | "PSBT Operations" dialog by gwillen · Pull Request #18027 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 19:11:24 That one is great too 19:12:12 The UI is tangential to my hardware wallet PR's though, beacuse you won't need to touch PSBT manually. 19:12:57 Though I can see how in multisig you might receive a PSBT via "email", load it and then sign on a device. So eventually it'll have a role. 19:13:07 topic suggestion: how much bdb code do people want to review? 19:13:28 #topic BDB code review (achow101) 19:13:32 But my initial implementation assumes single sig, with only modest thought put into multisig (I closed a PR for that, too much of a stack) 19:13:59 Is there a choice in how much? 19:14:04 I've split out chunks of #18971 into a bunch of seperate PRs that are pretty easy to review 19:14:06 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18971 | wallet: Refactor the classes in wallet/db.{cpp/h} by achow101 · Pull Request #18971 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 19:14:18 the rest of it is introducing the WalletDatabase abstract class and some BDB changes 19:14:29 but I've realized I can introduce the WalletDatabase class without those BDB changes 19:14:44 Maybe use a checkbox - [ ] instead of (merged) for easier visual inspection 19:15:03 so do people want to have the abstract class and then the BDB changes separately? 19:15:13 Yes please 19:15:22 BDB is scary enough as move-only :-) 19:15:24 I'd say so yep 19:15:24 I fear the if I do that, those changes won't get merged, but at the same time, those changes will probably hold up the classsepparation 19:16:17 I'd like to get Sqlite3 in relatlively long before 0.21 branch off 19:16:27 alright then 19:16:31 That seems more important than improving DBD 19:16:32 I guess bdb is going to remain a mess 19:16:37 at least it'll be a self contained mess 19:17:12 We can make it a priority to get it reviewed and merged 19:17:16 It'll be fine 19:19:02 Alright since Luke still isn't here then we'll keep this short and sweet :) 19:19:06 #endmeeting