1 2016-05-05T00:03:14  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
  2 2016-05-05T00:12:39  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  3 2016-05-05T00:16:53  *** kadoban has quit IRC
  4 2016-05-05T00:22:49  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
  5 2016-05-05T00:24:27  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2016-05-05T00:27:54  *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2016-05-05T00:31:30  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
  8 2016-05-05T00:33:01  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  9 2016-05-05T00:33:24  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2016-05-05T00:41:18  *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2016-05-05T00:50:41  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 12 2016-05-05T00:52:12  *** go1111111 has quit IRC
 13 2016-05-05T00:55:35  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2016-05-05T01:07:04  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 15 2016-05-05T01:07:35  *** go1111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2016-05-05T01:07:52  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
 17 2016-05-05T01:08:16  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 18 2016-05-05T01:10:08  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2016-05-05T01:18:27  *** arowser has quit IRC
 20 2016-05-05T01:18:41  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2016-05-05T01:24:55  *** TomMc has quit IRC
 22 2016-05-05T01:29:39  *** molly has quit IRC
 23 2016-05-05T01:30:02  *** molly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 24 2016-05-05T01:35:12  *** belcher has quit IRC
 25 2016-05-05T01:37:33  *** TomMc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 26 2016-05-05T01:38:16  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2016-05-05T01:41:09  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 28 2016-05-05T01:45:04  *** bitcoin-wizards4 has quit IRC
 29 2016-05-05T01:55:44  *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 30 2016-05-05T01:58:04  *** molly has quit IRC
 31 2016-05-05T02:14:52  *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 32 2016-05-05T02:31:49  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 33 2016-05-05T02:37:21  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
 34 2016-05-05T02:49:24  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
 35 2016-05-05T03:00:01  <BlueMatt> lol, did a chainsync with infinite dbcache and, on shutdown, bitcoind did a 1.5G malloc
 36 2016-05-05T03:00:53  <luke-jr> >_<
 37 2016-05-05T03:03:51  <BlueMatt> wait...wtf
 38 2016-05-05T03:04:03  <BlueMatt> and on startup, with a tiny dbcache...leveldb did a 2.1G alloc
 39 2016-05-05T03:04:06  <BlueMatt> that cant be right
 40 2016-05-05T03:04:46  <BlueMatt> yea, it is
 41 2016-05-05T03:04:54  <BlueMatt> heh, the first time you restart after that it does insane things
 42 2016-05-05T03:08:18  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 43 2016-05-05T03:15:01  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 44 2016-05-05T03:15:25  *** TomMc has quit IRC
 45 2016-05-05T03:16:06  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 46 2016-05-05T04:06:22  *** blur3d has quit IRC
 47 2016-05-05T04:15:46  *** go1111111 has quit IRC
 48 2016-05-05T04:32:37  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 49 2016-05-05T04:39:15  *** go1111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2016-05-05T04:43:16  *** PRab has quit IRC
 51 2016-05-05T04:48:12  <GitHub82> [bitcoin] catilac opened pull request #8004: signal handling: fReopenDebugLog and fRequestShutdown should be type sig_atomic_t (master...fix_signal_handler) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8004
 52 2016-05-05T05:13:02  *** jus7672 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 53 2016-05-05T05:21:20  *** jus7672 has quit IRC
 54 2016-05-05T05:34:20  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 55 2016-05-05T05:35:01  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 56 2016-05-05T05:36:07  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 57 2016-05-05T05:48:37  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
 58 2016-05-05T06:16:07  *** [Author] has quit IRC
 59 2016-05-05T06:20:28  <GitHub154> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8206835cc173...42a67533828f
 60 2016-05-05T06:20:29  <GitHub154> bitcoin/master 9eaa0af Wladimir J. van der Laan: tinyformat: force USE_VARIADIC_TEMPLATES...
 61 2016-05-05T06:20:29  <GitHub154> bitcoin/master 08d7b56 Wladimir J. van der Laan: util: switch LogPrint and error to variadic templates
 62 2016-05-05T06:20:30  <GitHub154> bitcoin/master 42a6753 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8000: tinyformat: force USE_VARIADIC_TEMPLATES...
 63 2016-05-05T06:20:38  <GitHub192> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8000: tinyformat: force USE_VARIADIC_TEMPLATES (master...2016_05_tinyformat_variadic) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8000
 64 2016-05-05T06:26:11  *** [Author] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2016-05-05T06:26:30  *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 66 2016-05-05T06:42:28  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2016-05-05T06:42:28  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 68 2016-05-05T06:45:42  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
 69 2016-05-05T06:56:22  *** imacomput has quit IRC
 70 2016-05-05T07:13:00  *** ghtdak has quit IRC
 71 2016-05-05T07:15:17  <cjcj> What is the git process for including a specific PR (#6853) into the v0.11.2 branch?
 72 2016-05-05T07:16:20  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2016-05-05T07:18:22  <Guest7895> cjcj: it gets backporter if it's considered critical
 74 2016-05-05T07:18:40  <Guest7895> v0.11.2 is a release, not a branch, by the way
 75 2016-05-05T07:20:13  <Guest7895> 6853 is not a bugfix, and certainly not a critical one
 76 2016-05-05T07:21:39  *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2016-05-05T07:24:21  *** gill3s has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 78 2016-05-05T07:24:43  <btcdrak> cjcj: all changes should be made to master, and then they can be backported as required. You backport to the specific branch 0.12, and 0.11
 79 2016-05-05T07:26:13  <btcdrak> cjcj: normally you just mark it as "requires backport", and the maintainers will cherry-pick backport it after merge, but if it has lots of merge conflicts with the backport branch then you may need to open a PR for it (but wait until master merge first).
 80 2016-05-05T07:29:36  *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2016-05-05T07:30:17  <cjcj> btcdrak: I never intended to PR this. It would be for my own use only. The 0.12 branch doesn't work for some reason for my case, and #6853 is the only PR from 0.12 I really need. Was just wondering of a painless way to include it, but I think I will just build from CodeSharks fNoRetarget branch.
 82 2016-05-05T07:31:30  <Guest7895> cjcj: well you can git cherry-pick
 83 2016-05-05T07:31:50  <Guest7895> though i'm interested why 0.12 does not work for you... perhaps that's an indication of a bigger problem
 84 2016-05-05T07:33:41  <btcdrak> what does "does not work for me" mean specifically?
 85 2016-05-05T07:33:50  *** Guest7895 has quit IRC
 86 2016-05-05T07:33:51  *** Guest7895 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 87 2016-05-05T07:34:27  *** Guest7895 is now known as sipa
 88 2016-05-05T07:34:54  <cjcj> Guest7895: Will check out that command. Am not very familiar with git yet. I don't know yet why 0.12, but I bet the problem is on my end. For now 0.11.2 just works so I will continue from there for now.
 89 2016-05-05T07:39:30  <cjcj> btcdrak: The program crashes when I make an RPC request in 0.12 after running for a while, but it works fine in 0.11.
 90 2016-05-05T07:40:51  <sipa> perhaps you should open an issue for that?
 91 2016-05-05T07:40:58  <sipa> or is this with heavy local modifications?
 92 2016-05-05T07:42:43  <cjcj> sipa: I think the problem is on my end, but I will debug the issue further when I got time and open an issue if it doesn't resolve.
 93 2016-05-05T07:43:05  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 94 2016-05-05T07:43:13  <cjcj> I'm using python-bitcoinlib as well, so maybe the issue could lie there.
 95 2016-05-05T07:43:43  <cjcj> Are there heavy differences in the RPC code between 0.11 and 0.12?
 96 2016-05-05T07:44:15  <sipa> you'll need to give a bit more information about what you're doing
 97 2016-05-05T07:44:25  <sipa> some things changed a lot, others not at all
 98 2016-05-05T07:45:11  <wumpus> yes, you need to be more specific about what is not working, 'it doesn't work' is  not a good bug report
 99 2016-05-05T07:45:47  <wumpus> what are you doing, what error do you get back
100 2016-05-05T07:46:10  <wumpus> does bitcoind crash ,if so can you provide a traceback
101 2016-05-05T07:46:16  <wumpus> etc
102 2016-05-05T07:47:14  <wumpus> if you just want to cherry-pick one commit, use the git cherry-pick command, it may be easy, it may also be very hard if the surrounding code changed a lot between 0.11 and 0.12 (large chance)
103 2016-05-05T07:49:20  <cjcj> bitcoind doesn't crash, only the python script I'm running. Will provide a traceback once I have removed some personal info from it.
104 2016-05-05T07:49:47  <sipa> ah, ok :)
105 2016-05-05T08:24:07  *** arowser has quit IRC
106 2016-05-05T08:25:06  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2016-05-05T08:29:08  *** gill3s has quit IRC
108 2016-05-05T08:29:09  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
109 2016-05-05T08:48:47  *** Justinus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
110 2016-05-05T08:52:02  *** PRab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
111 2016-05-05T08:52:22  *** kadoban has quit IRC
112 2016-05-05T08:52:48  *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
113 2016-05-05T08:54:18  *** BashCo has quit IRC
114 2016-05-05T08:59:17  <GitHub26> [bitcoin] avar closed pull request #8003: Get rid of a compiler warning due to #if 0'd test (master...fix-unused-function-compiler-warning) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8003
115 2016-05-05T08:59:52  <GitHub154> [bitcoin] avar opened pull request #8005: Add a comment indicating that the btc devs don't want a warning fixed (master...note-that-unused-function-compiler-warning-should-not-be-fixed) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8005
116 2016-05-05T09:04:25  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
117 2016-05-05T09:14:02  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
118 2016-05-05T09:20:09  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
119 2016-05-05T09:25:54  *** ghtdak has quit IRC
120 2016-05-05T09:27:16  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
121 2016-05-05T09:59:11  *** jtimon has quit IRC
122 2016-05-05T09:59:17  *** kadoban has quit IRC
123 2016-05-05T10:38:10  *** xiangfu has quit IRC
124 2016-05-05T10:44:01  <GitHub73> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/42a67533828f...f9b4582292e8
125 2016-05-05T10:44:01  <GitHub73> bitcoin/master 47eda2d fanquake: [depends] Add -stdlib=libc++ to darwin CXX flags
126 2016-05-05T10:44:02  <GitHub73> bitcoin/master f9b4582 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8002: [depends] Add -stdlib=libc++ to darwin CXX flags...
127 2016-05-05T10:44:16  <GitHub176> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8002: [depends] Add -stdlib=libc++ to darwin CXX flags (master...depends-darwin-stdlib) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8002
128 2016-05-05T10:48:01  *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
129 2016-05-05T10:52:24  <GitHub88> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f9b4582292e8...ff69aafe52f9
130 2016-05-05T10:52:24  <GitHub88> bitcoin/master 0281678 Warren Togami: doc: Fedora build requirements
131 2016-05-05T10:52:25  <GitHub88> bitcoin/master ff69aaf Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7968: doc: Fedora build requirements...
132 2016-05-05T10:52:35  <GitHub75> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7968: doc: Fedora build requirements (master...fedora_build_readme) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7968
133 2016-05-05T10:52:53  <GitHub74> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ff69aafe52f9...e8d917591f28
134 2016-05-05T10:52:53  <GitHub74> bitcoin/master f7c4f79 Daniel Kraft: [trivial] Add missing const qualifiers....
135 2016-05-05T10:52:54  <GitHub74> bitcoin/master e8d9175 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7977: [trivial] Add missing const qualifiers....
136 2016-05-05T10:53:04  <GitHub193> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7977: [trivial] Add missing const qualifiers. (master...consts) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7977
137 2016-05-05T10:54:33  <GitHub20> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e8d917591f28...06303533230f
138 2016-05-05T10:54:34  <GitHub20> bitcoin/master f90efbf Andrew: Create signmessagewithprivkey rpc...
139 2016-05-05T10:54:34  <GitHub20> bitcoin/master 7db0ecb Andrew Chow: Test for signing messages...
140 2016-05-05T10:54:35  <GitHub20> bitcoin/master 0630353 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7953: Create signmessagewithprivkey rpc...
141 2016-05-05T10:54:42  <GitHub14> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7953: Create signmessagewithprivkey rpc (master...signmessagewithprivkey) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7953
142 2016-05-05T10:57:52  <GitHub54> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/06303533230f...d51618e481ab
143 2016-05-05T10:57:53  <GitHub54> bitcoin/master 091d6e0 Wladimir J. van der Laan: http: Do a pending c++11 simplification...
144 2016-05-05T10:57:53  <GitHub54> bitcoin/master f97b410 Wladimir J. van der Laan: http: Add log message when work queue is full...
145 2016-05-05T10:57:54  <GitHub54> bitcoin/master 37b2137 Wladimir J. van der Laan: http: Change boost::scoped_ptr to std::unique_ptr in HTTPRequest...
146 2016-05-05T10:58:00  <GitHub179> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7966: http: Do a pending c++11 simplification handling work items (master...2016_04_httpserver_c++11) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7966
147 2016-05-05T10:58:02  *** anchow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
148 2016-05-05T11:01:15  <wumpus> anything else that is ready for merge?
149 2016-05-05T11:02:13  *** achow101 has quit IRC
150 2016-05-05T11:02:34  *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2016-05-05T11:02:40  <gmaxwell> I wish I knew where #7840 was.
152 2016-05-05T11:09:01  <wumpus> well seems to have plenty of tested as well as untested acks
153 2016-05-05T11:09:19  <wumpus> there are some nits by sdaftuar: do they need to be handled in that pull?
154 2016-05-05T11:10:00  <gmaxwell> sipa wanted to stop making refactors further, otherwise it would never go in, so I dont ~think~ so.
155 2016-05-05T11:10:11  <gmaxwell> I have further changes on top of that that I'm siting on waiting for that to go in.
156 2016-05-05T11:10:24  <wumpus> if there is nothing *critical* and it's only about refactors, I'd suggest the same
157 2016-05-05T11:13:15  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
158 2016-05-05T11:13:15  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
159 2016-05-05T11:14:33  <wumpus> so that means #7840 is ready...
160 2016-05-05T11:14:59  <GitHub130> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 6 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d51618e481ab...3b9a0bf41f23
161 2016-05-05T11:15:00  <GitHub130> bitcoin/master f2d3ba7 Gregory Maxwell: Eliminate TX trickle bypass, sort TX invs for privacy and priority....
162 2016-05-05T11:15:00  <GitHub130> bitcoin/master dc13dcd Pieter Wuille: Split up and optimize transaction and block inv queues
163 2016-05-05T11:15:01  <GitHub130> bitcoin/master ed70683 Pieter Wuille: Handle mempool requests in send loop, subject to trickle...
164 2016-05-05T11:15:06  <GitHub56> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7840: Several performance and privacy improvements to inv/mempool handling (master...splitinvtxblock) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7840
165 2016-05-05T11:15:19  <wumpus> anything else?
166 2016-05-05T11:16:19  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
167 2016-05-05T11:16:32  <wumpus> doing final testing on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7814 at the moment
168 2016-05-05T11:16:46  <gmaxwell> wumpus: whats the goal in the rounds of merging right now? just cleaning out backlog?
169 2016-05-05T11:16:54  <wumpus> just moving forward
170 2016-05-05T11:17:05  <gmaxwell> Good.
171 2016-05-05T11:18:31  <gmaxwell> #7934 seems good to me I've had it running since my utACK without issue.
172 2016-05-05T11:23:17  *** fengling has quit IRC
173 2016-05-05T11:25:23  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2016-05-05T11:25:29  <fanquake> wumpus issues that could be reviewed/closed by inactivity 6835 6355
175 2016-05-05T11:26:37  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
176 2016-05-05T11:28:02  <wumpus> yes #6835 won't be merged anyway - it at least used to be kept up to date by people that cared about it, but it can just as well be a separate branch on someone's repository without being a pull request
177 2016-05-05T11:29:31  <fanquake> Also #7149
178 2016-05-05T11:30:24  <wumpus> not sure about #6355, seems it just received very little review and testing
179 2016-05-05T11:31:37  <wumpus> generally I don't close pulls for inactivty, only issues, if the OP doesn't respond to requests for more data. In this case the author can't help that his PR received so little attention
180 2016-05-05T11:32:51  <wumpus> bah #7149 has a lot of changes for a 'bugfix'
181 2016-05-05T11:47:04  <fanquake> Seems that #7814 fails on osx when you run the extended test suite
182 2016-05-05T11:51:54  *** MarcoFalk_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2016-05-05T11:52:32  <MarcoFalk_> fanquake, which test / exception?
184 2016-05-05T11:54:47  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
185 2016-05-05T11:55:20  <fanquake> MarcoFalk_ will post to GH
186 2016-05-05T11:57:09  <fanquake> Looks like you've just missed signmessages.py
187 2016-05-05T11:59:22  <MarcoFalk_> When was this merged?
188 2016-05-05T11:59:29  <MarcoFalk_> Is probably a merge conflict
189 2016-05-05T12:00:07  <MarcoFalk_> You are running merge(master, pull) ?
190 2016-05-05T12:00:12  <fanquake> When did I merge it? 10 minutes ago
191 2016-05-05T12:00:35  <fanquake> Looking at the PR, you haven't touched signmessages.py at all
192 2016-05-05T12:02:52  <MarcoFalk_> Oh, actually you need to compile if you also want to run the signmessage.py test
193 2016-05-05T12:03:11  *** arowser has quit IRC
194 2016-05-05T12:03:24  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
195 2016-05-05T12:10:17  <GitHub118> [bitcoin] Tyler-Hardin opened pull request #8006: Qt: Add option to disable the system tray icon (master...disable-tray) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8006
196 2016-05-05T12:14:42  <jonasschnelli> Whoha! PR/Issue# >8000!
197 2016-05-05T12:15:56  <wumpus> it will take some getting used to 5-digit PRs/issues
198 2016-05-05T12:17:29  <jonasschnelli> hah.. yes. Soon.
199 2016-05-05T12:18:25  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
200 2016-05-05T12:22:55  *** fanquake has left #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2016-05-05T12:30:35  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
202 2016-05-05T12:49:01  *** MarcoFalk_ has quit IRC
203 2016-05-05T12:55:52  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
204 2016-05-05T13:00:37  *** fengling has quit IRC
205 2016-05-05T13:15:08  *** blur3d has quit IRC
206 2016-05-05T13:20:24  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
207 2016-05-05T13:31:52  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
208 2016-05-05T13:41:07  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
209 2016-05-05T13:41:07  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
210 2016-05-05T13:50:29  *** TomMc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
211 2016-05-05T13:51:38  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212 2016-05-05T14:07:04  *** muuqwaul has quit IRC
213 2016-05-05T14:15:46  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
214 2016-05-05T14:20:55  *** MrHodl has quit IRC
215 2016-05-05T14:25:57  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
216 2016-05-05T14:27:30  *** BashCo has quit IRC
217 2016-05-05T14:30:15  *** gill3s has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
218 2016-05-05T14:31:33  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
219 2016-05-05T14:31:35  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
220 2016-05-05T14:34:50  *** BonyM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2016-05-05T14:36:05  *** gill3s has quit IRC
222 2016-05-05T14:38:27  *** BonyM has quit IRC
223 2016-05-05T14:38:44  *** BonyM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2016-05-05T14:40:03  *** gill3s has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
225 2016-05-05T14:45:08  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
226 2016-05-05T14:45:27  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
227 2016-05-05T14:49:10  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
228 2016-05-05T14:53:31  *** BashCo has quit IRC
229 2016-05-05T14:55:31  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
230 2016-05-05T14:58:56  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
231 2016-05-05T14:59:20  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232 2016-05-05T15:03:36  *** fengling has quit IRC
233 2016-05-05T15:04:48  <GitHub126> [bitcoin] kazcw opened pull request #8007: Minor locking improvements (master...locknits) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8007
234 2016-05-05T15:19:47  *** gill3s has quit IRC
235 2016-05-05T15:21:13  *** [\\\] has quit IRC
236 2016-05-05T15:22:31  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
237 2016-05-05T15:27:51  *** ebfull has quit IRC
238 2016-05-05T15:42:30  *** muuqwaul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
239 2016-05-05T16:02:32  *** tylerhardin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
240 2016-05-05T16:06:52  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
241 2016-05-05T16:07:59  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242 2016-05-05T16:10:00  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
243 2016-05-05T16:10:49  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
244 2016-05-05T16:27:28  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2016-05-05T16:29:14  *** dirtynewshoes has quit IRC
246 2016-05-05T16:31:22  *** dirtynewshoes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
247 2016-05-05T16:43:36  *** Don_John has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
248 2016-05-05T16:44:42  *** Don_John has quit IRC
249 2016-05-05T16:56:31  *** jannes has quit IRC
250 2016-05-05T17:00:34  *** muuqwaul has quit IRC
251 2016-05-05T17:02:00  <GitHub84> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3b9a0bf41f23...006cdf64dc93
252 2016-05-05T17:02:00  <GitHub84> bitcoin/master ec9ad5f Patrick Strateman: Replace memcmp with std::equal in CScript::FindAndDelete...
253 2016-05-05T17:02:01  <GitHub84> bitcoin/master c0f660c Patrick Strateman: Replace c-style cast with c++ style static_cast.
254 2016-05-05T17:02:01  <GitHub84> bitcoin/master e2a30bc Gavin Andresen: Unit test for CScript::FindAndDelete
255 2016-05-05T17:02:04  <GitHub194> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7907:  Optimize and Cleanup CScript::FindAndDelete (master...2016-04-17-findanddelete) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7907
256 2016-05-05T17:02:06  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
257 2016-05-05T17:04:58  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
258 2016-05-05T17:05:03  <GitHub197> [bitcoin] JeremyRand opened pull request #8009: Docs: Fixed invalid example paths in gitian-building.md (master...doc-gitian-building-offline-paths-fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8009
259 2016-05-05T17:06:37  *** fengling has quit IRC
260 2016-05-05T17:12:07  *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
261 2016-05-05T17:24:53  *** fedruantine has quit IRC
262 2016-05-05T17:27:19  *** arowser has quit IRC
263 2016-05-05T17:27:47  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2016-05-05T17:31:37  *** jtimon has quit IRC
265 2016-05-05T17:46:34  *** TomMc has quit IRC
266 2016-05-05T18:23:01  *** ebfull has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
267 2016-05-05T18:23:44  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
268 2016-05-05T18:26:10  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
269 2016-05-05T18:30:15  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
270 2016-05-05T18:56:03  *** To7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
271 2016-05-05T18:57:17  *** muuqwaul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272 2016-05-05T19:00:09  <wumpus> meeting time?
273 2016-05-05T19:00:28  <anchow101> yes?
274 2016-05-05T19:00:54  <btcdrak> yes
275 2016-05-05T19:01:09  <jonasschnelli> yes
276 2016-05-05T19:01:24  <gmaxwell> I guess so.
277 2016-05-05T19:01:24  <wumpus> #startmeeting
278 2016-05-05T19:01:24  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu May  5 19:01:24 2016 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
279 2016-05-05T19:01:24  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
280 2016-05-05T19:01:51  <BlueMatt> hi all
281 2016-05-05T19:02:02  <btcdrak> topics?
282 2016-05-05T19:02:17  <wumpus> last week's action items were
283 2016-05-05T19:02:18  <wumpus> ACTION: (sipa) list a few areas where i think mildly tricky things are done that warrant review (wumpus, 19:08:50)
284 2016-05-05T19:02:23  *** TomMc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
285 2016-05-05T19:02:26  <sipa> in a plane, i can only stay online for 15 minutes
286 2016-05-05T19:02:32  <wumpus> ACTION: bip 144 needs to include the service bit stuff
287 2016-05-05T19:02:33  <sipa> oops, forgot about that; will do
288 2016-05-05T19:02:40  <sipa> that's done
289 2016-05-05T19:02:42  <instagibbs> wumpus, merged
290 2016-05-05T19:02:45  <gmaxwell> petertodd: morcos: sdaftuar: phantomcircuit: MarcoFalk_: jonasschnelli: luke-jr: jtimon: instagibbs:
291 2016-05-05T19:02:45  <wumpus> ACTION: (gmaxwell) try to extract some feedback e.g. from roasbeef to reimplemented, who might be aware of other limitations in the spec
292 2016-05-05T19:03:00  <phantomcircuit> im here
293 2016-05-05T19:03:04  <sdaftuar> hi
294 2016-05-05T19:03:18  <cfields> here
295 2016-05-05T19:03:26  <gmaxwell> wumpus: I've failed to do that so far, sorry.
296 2016-05-05T19:03:39  <wumpus> no rush I suppose
297 2016-05-05T19:03:43  <wumpus> any other topics?
298 2016-05-05T19:03:59  <anchow101> segwit versionbit
299 2016-05-05T19:04:02  <nickler> I've had a look at the btcd segwit PR, it includes around 5 tests
300 2016-05-05T19:04:21  <wumpus> #topic segwit versionbit
301 2016-05-05T19:04:44  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302 2016-05-05T19:04:53  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
303 2016-05-05T19:04:59  <anchow101> The bip still says tbd for bit and date.
304 2016-05-05T19:05:08  * sipa randomly proposes bit (1 << 4)
305 2016-05-05T19:05:28  * instagibbs tries rng, gets 4
306 2016-05-05T19:05:30  <wumpus> if there's no special reason to pick a specific bit I'd suggest previous_bit+1
307 2016-05-05T19:05:31  <btcdrak> 8 is lucky in China
308 2016-05-05T19:05:52  <sdaftuar> previous_bit + 1 makes sense to me...
309 2016-05-05T19:05:55  <btcdrak> wumpus: ack
310 2016-05-05T19:05:55  <sipa> so (1 << 1), also fine
311 2016-05-05T19:06:00  <anchow101> +1
312 2016-05-05T19:06:13  <BlueMatt> I'm with btcdrak
313 2016-05-05T19:06:22  <wumpus> otherwise it leaves holes, not a big deal, but dealing out consecutively may reduce the chance of accidentally duplicate assignments
314 2016-05-05T19:06:31  <btcdrak> are we ready to think about dates? even for testnet?
315 2016-05-05T19:06:50  <jl2012> i think we should set the testnet date now?
316 2016-05-05T19:06:53  <gmaxwell> sipa: whatever number you're proposing please post it to the mailing list.
317 2016-05-05T19:07:17  <jl2012> start 1 Apr 2016, end 1 Jan 2018?
318 2016-05-05T19:07:26  <wumpus> probably we should have some living document that keeps track of current bit assignments, outside the bips
319 2016-05-05T19:07:32  <NicolasDorier> for testnet do we need a date ? we did not for csv
320 2016-05-05T19:08:23  <anchow101> NicolasDorier, the dat for csv on testnet was March 1st
321 2016-05-05T19:08:27  <anchow101> *date
322 2016-05-05T19:08:35  <NicolasDorier> ok my bad
323 2016-05-05T19:09:36  *** fengling has quit IRC
324 2016-05-05T19:09:46  <btcdrak> wumpus: maybe we can add a file bip-0009/assignments.md in the bips repository
325 2016-05-05T19:09:49  <anchow101> If the release can be out before June, what about June 1st for a mainnet start date? And May 1st for testnet?
326 2016-05-05T19:09:56  *** cloudnthings has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
327 2016-05-05T19:10:22  <gmaxwell> Dates should not be set until the software is known ready for release, and we are not currently there.
328 2016-05-05T19:10:29  <gmaxwell> There is no need to be over-eager.
329 2016-05-05T19:10:36  <sipa> i think we need to have a deployment active on testnet before even beginning to consider a start time on mainnet
330 2016-05-05T19:10:51  <wumpus> btcdrak: sounds good to me
331 2016-05-05T19:10:58  <gmaxwell> I think june first would be fine, but it could be set the day before, for all the system cares.
332 2016-05-05T19:11:29  <wumpus> #action add a file bip-0009/assignments.md in the bips repository to keep track of an overview of current bit assignments separate from their bips
333 2016-05-05T19:11:32  <btcdrak> jl2012: no need to have such a long expiry date for testnet.
334 2016-05-05T19:13:26  <wumpus> okay
335 2016-05-05T19:13:53  <wumpus> so do people agree on june 1?
336 2016-05-05T19:14:03  <morcos> for testnet?
337 2016-05-05T19:14:04  <sipa> for testnet?
338 2016-05-05T19:14:10  <morcos> i don't see why not make it earlier
339 2016-05-05T19:14:14  <wumpus> that's what the discussion is about right?
340 2016-05-05T19:14:24  <morcos> it kind of doesn't matter, just make it may 1st and it happens when it happens
341 2016-05-05T19:14:32  <sipa> indeed
342 2016-05-05T19:14:36  <wumpus> for mainnet it'd be kind of crazy to decide on an activation date now IMO
343 2016-05-05T19:14:37  <btcdrak> morcos: ack
344 2016-05-05T19:14:43  <sipa> we're not testing the deployment logic and teansitions
345 2016-05-05T19:14:47  <gmaxwell> morcos +1 for testnet.
346 2016-05-05T19:14:58  <sipa> may 1st for testnet sounds finr
347 2016-05-05T19:15:04  <wumpus> may 1st? more time travel? I've seen enough deloreans this week
348 2016-05-05T19:15:10  <jonasschnelli> hah
349 2016-05-05T19:15:11  <morcos> i might be obnoxious and start now...  :)
350 2016-05-05T19:15:19  <instagibbs> morcos, hostile softforks incoming
351 2016-05-05T19:15:26  * sipa is going to disappear
352 2016-05-05T19:15:27  <gmaxwell> This date is not something that needs to be set _in advance_, and it also shouldn't be set without coordiating with other implementers (at least in principle)
353 2016-05-05T19:15:38  <morcos> wumpus: its what we did with csv, it just means you can starg signaling immediately
354 2016-05-05T19:15:44  <wumpus> okay, no decision on a date then
355 2016-05-05T19:16:02  <wumpus> #action discuss testnet activation date on bitcoin-dev mailing list
356 2016-05-05T19:16:07  <morcos> gmaxwell: i kind of disagree, i think that the code is mature enough that we should activate on testnet now
357 2016-05-05T19:16:16  <gmaxwell> morcos: I'm not talking about testnet.
358 2016-05-05T19:16:25  <morcos> gmaxwell: teh rest of us are  :)
359 2016-05-05T19:16:26  <wumpus> we AREE talking about testnet
360 2016-05-05T19:16:31  <gmaxwell> Testnet is fine. do whatever with testnet. If it causes turbulance there, oh well.
361 2016-05-05T19:16:33  <wumpus> please don't confuse things
362 2016-05-05T19:16:49  <gmaxwell> wumpus: _YOU_ are talking about testnet jl2012 and anchow101 were not.
363 2016-05-05T19:17:08  <gmaxwell> I already +1 morcos for testnet.
364 2016-05-05T19:17:08  <wumpus> huh *confused*
365 2016-05-05T19:17:08  <jl2012> no, I'm talking about testnet
366 2016-05-05T19:17:29  <phantomcircuit> haha
367 2016-05-05T19:17:35  <morcos> ok so to summarize, email to bitcoin ML stating we are setting the testnet activation start date as may 1st because we believe at this point the activation start date is likely the only consensus change remaining with segwit
368 2016-05-05T19:18:12  <gmaxwell> Because it's testnet and the delayed start logic doesn't apply there, we don't care about creating turbulance there if miners upgrade ahead of nodes.
369 2016-05-05T19:18:12  <wumpus> makes sense
370 2016-05-05T19:18:20  <morcos> this will allow anyone to test their various versions of segwit (different implementations and backports) against each other potentially even before merging
371 2016-05-05T19:18:47  <anchow101> morcos: ack
372 2016-05-05T19:18:52  <morcos> gmaxwell: yes there is no reason to delay, but there is reason to agree on the start date so that we all activate at the same time
373 2016-05-05T19:19:21  <gmaxwell> morcos: yes, may first is fine.
374 2016-05-05T19:19:33  *** anchow101 is now known as achow101
375 2016-05-05T19:19:39  <btcdrak> ok so (1<<1) with activation may 1st for testnet, and (1<<1) and date TDB for mainnet
376 2016-05-05T19:19:48  <jonasschnelli> ack
377 2016-05-05T19:19:52  <achow101> yes
378 2016-05-05T19:20:07  <morcos> btcdrak: ack
379 2016-05-05T19:20:20  <paveljanik> ack
380 2016-05-05T19:20:26  <morcos> but what does TDB stand for?  :)
381 2016-05-05T19:20:43  * btcdrak palms face
382 2016-05-05T19:20:45  <gmaxwell> Totally delicious burger.
383 2016-05-05T19:20:48  <jl2012> ack 1 May testnet, how about expiry date?
384 2016-05-05T19:20:55  <cfields> ack, but we need to get the gbt changes in place quickly so that testnet is a valid representation of what miners will be running
385 2016-05-05T19:21:03  <btcdrak> j2012: 1 year.
386 2016-05-05T19:21:09  <morcos> ack 1 year
387 2016-05-05T19:21:27  <BlueMatt> sgtm
388 2016-05-05T19:21:31  <btcdrak> (1<<1) with activation may 1st and expiry 1 year for testnet, and (1<<1) and dates TBD for mainnet
389 2016-05-05T19:21:34  <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: when will we see testnet fork?
390 2016-05-05T19:21:47  <morcos> cfields: can you summarize what GBT changes are needed still?
391 2016-05-05T19:22:57  <morcos> does #7935 have anything at all to do with segwit?
392 2016-05-05T19:23:27  <cfields> morcos: there's a proposal to bip9 that would require that miners set a flag signaling awareness of segwit
393 2016-05-05T19:23:46  <cfields> *proposed amendment
394 2016-05-05T19:24:39  <cfields> morcos: see https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/365
395 2016-05-05T19:25:14  <morcos> ok i haven't read through all that but i kind of thought it was orthogonal to segwit.  we already have versionbits SF's in the process of being activated.  is segwit somehow materially different.  if not, lets not confuse the issues
396 2016-05-05T19:25:58  <gmaxwell> morcos: it's just that a non-sw aware miner can't use GBT w/ segwit and keep mining while they can use CSV.
397 2016-05-05T19:26:40  <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: i don't follow why that is, can you explain?
398 2016-05-05T19:27:16  <cfields> morcos: assuming that's adopted, some miners won't be creating blocks with commitments, so i'd like to make sure that we're testing on testnet. Otherwise it's not a great representation of mainnet mining.
399 2016-05-05T19:27:21  <gmaxwell> I could be speaking out of my rear, my understanding at a distance was that non-SW ready gbt clients won't insert the commitment.
400 2016-05-05T19:27:32  <sdaftuar> but the commitment is created by bitcoind
401 2016-05-05T19:28:02  <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: classical GBT does not include a coinbase transaction, the client generates it using information from the template.
402 2016-05-05T19:28:13  <morcos> if can't use GBT means can't change the txs selected by bitcoind then maybe you're right, but that seems a secondary problem
403 2016-05-05T19:28:15  <cfields> sdaftuar: if a miner is too old to understand how to insert the commitment, bitcoind can provide only non-witness txs, so that the miner continues to produce valid blocks
404 2016-05-05T19:28:55  <morcos> maybe we should take this up after the meeting.
405 2016-05-05T19:29:14  <gmaxwell> sounds fine.
406 2016-05-05T19:29:53  <cfields> ok. i only mentioned because i'd like to start upstreaming the mining/pool patches if we're going to deploy on testnet. And can't do that until the gbt stuff is finalized
407 2016-05-05T19:30:02  <cfields> but fine to discuss later, i don't think it'll be an issue
408 2016-05-05T19:30:39  <wumpus> ok, any other topics to be discussed?
409 2016-05-05T19:30:42  <NicolasDorier> yes
410 2016-05-05T19:30:55  <NicolasDorier> I just want opinion about
411 2016-05-05T19:30:59  <NicolasDorier> making sure the wallet does not create uneconomical output based on current fees, and not based on mintxrelayfee (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7677)
412 2016-05-05T19:31:05  <wumpus> nickler mentioned btcd segwit PR tests, but I'm not sure that was a topic suggestion
413 2016-05-05T19:31:08  <morcos> cfields: i'd just like to distinguish between necessary changes and changes that are only needed if miners are going to be modifying the tx selection created by bitcoind.  the second category in my mind should not stand in the critical path
414 2016-05-05T19:31:46  <NicolasDorier> I had problems with customers when mintxrelayfee where bump because occasionally wallet would produce bellow mintxrelayfee dust for other nods.
415 2016-05-05T19:31:57  <wumpus> #topic uneconomical outputs in wallet based on current fees
416 2016-05-05T19:32:03  <NicolasDorier> So I proposed to work on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7677
417 2016-05-05T19:32:04  <nickler> wumpus: nope I was referring to the action item that mentioned roasbeefs implementation
418 2016-05-05T19:32:09  <BlueMatt> also compact block bip, if anyone has bothered to read that
419 2016-05-05T19:32:16  <wumpus> nickler: okay :)
420 2016-05-05T19:32:28  <cfields> morcos: this has nothing to do with miners modifying tx output. it's that miners need to opt-in to segwit in order for bitcoind to give it witness tx. And that opt-in signal hasn't been implemented yet.
421 2016-05-05T19:33:35  <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: was that a topic suggestion?
422 2016-05-05T19:34:10  <wumpus> any opinions on the wallet issue mentioned by NicolasDorier?
423 2016-05-05T19:34:22  <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: yes
424 2016-05-05T19:34:22  <gmaxwell> NicolasDorier: I'll take a look at the issue.
425 2016-05-05T19:34:28  <NicolasDorier> Breadwallet had issue also because of that when the mintxrelayfee was bumped
426 2016-05-05T19:34:39  <NicolasDorier> so I think we should fix the wallet to not use mintxrelayfee
427 2016-05-05T19:34:51  <NicolasDorier> but estimatedfee for determining the dust (only wallet part)
428 2016-05-05T19:35:13  <NicolasDorier> would prevent having reliability issue in case it need to be increase in the future
429 2016-05-05T19:35:14  <wumpus> it sounds sensible, wallet and relay policy are different things, although the mintxrelayfee should probably be the floor
430 2016-05-05T19:35:54  <gmaxwell> or the dust threshould should just be made an infrequently changed fixed constant.
431 2016-05-05T19:36:20  <NicolasDorier> gmaxwell: I am talking only about wallet, not relay policy
432 2016-05-05T19:36:38  <NicolasDorier> ah
433 2016-05-05T19:36:58  <NicolasDorier> I get your point. But well the problem would be the same with a constant. If we get a spam attack, we would increase it
434 2016-05-05T19:37:11  <NicolasDorier> and then some wallet will produce below dust rejected by updated nodes
435 2016-05-05T19:37:15  <morcos> yes, we should do both things
436 2016-05-05T19:37:18  <gmaxwell> lets discuss on the issue.
437 2016-05-05T19:37:24  <NicolasDorier> ok
438 2016-05-05T19:37:33  <NicolasDorier> there is another quick topic I want to talk about
439 2016-05-05T19:37:42  *** GreenIsMyPepper has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
440 2016-05-05T19:37:50  <morcos> we should separate wallet functionality to use some smarter higher value for "dust" and the floor for dust shoudl be a separate variable than the muliple of min relay that it is now
441 2016-05-05T19:38:21  <morcos> (floor for dust = policy relay limit for dust)
442 2016-05-05T19:38:25  <NicolasDorier> ok, seems good I'll start working on it. It made me some pain nin the past
443 2016-05-05T19:38:47  <gmaxwell> morcos: I agree.
444 2016-05-05T19:39:34  <NicolasDorier> My other quick topic is
445 2016-05-05T19:39:46  <NicolasDorier> long time ago I made a PR to remove unused flag and code
446 2016-05-05T19:39:54  <NicolasDorier> on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7574
447 2016-05-05T19:40:01  <NicolasDorier> morcos a jtimon had a better idea
448 2016-05-05T19:40:08  <NicolasDorier> instead of removing the flag
449 2016-05-05T19:40:26  <NicolasDorier> transforming it into one flag for all consensus stuff
450 2016-05-05T19:40:36  <NicolasDorier> I'm thinking working on it but
451 2016-05-05T19:41:00  <NicolasDorier> if I understand it seems to be better to do such kind of work after the merge of segwit ?
452 2016-05-05T19:42:27  <gmaxwell> NicolasDorier: usually if that question arises the answer is yes.
453 2016-05-05T19:42:39  <wumpus> yes I think for such non-trivial consensus refactoring it's better to wait until after segwit
454 2016-05-05T19:42:52  <NicolasDorier> ok so I'll keep it for later
455 2016-05-05T19:44:07  <wumpus> ok
456 2016-05-05T19:44:24  <wumpus> #topic compact block bip
457 2016-05-05T19:44:24  <gmaxwell> Next subject?
458 2016-05-05T19:44:29  <gmaxwell> I read it!
459 2016-05-05T19:45:03  <BlueMatt> you're the only one :'(
460 2016-05-05T19:45:14  <sdaftuar> not true...
461 2016-05-05T19:46:10  <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: would you like other people to read it?
462 2016-05-05T19:46:21  <BlueMatt> I would :p
463 2016-05-05T19:46:24  <BlueMatt> next topic?
464 2016-05-05T19:47:36  <cfields> heh, ack
465 2016-05-05T19:47:45  <cfields> (ack to reading)
466 2016-05-05T19:47:53  <btcdrak> ^
467 2016-05-05T19:48:08  <wumpus> so there's nothing about the contents to be discussed?
468 2016-05-05T19:48:17  <BlueMatt> wumpus: not really...just hoping for feedback
469 2016-05-05T19:48:36  <wumpus> that's what I mean, no feedback
470 2016-05-05T19:48:37  <btcdrak> it's pretty dense reading, might need another week...
471 2016-05-05T19:48:37  <BlueMatt> wumpus: I think all the outstanding decisions were concluded between gmaxwell and I
472 2016-05-05T19:48:44  <BlueMatt> true
473 2016-05-05T19:48:56  <gmaxwell> I gave a fair amount of feedback to Matt and he updated prior to putting it up.
474 2016-05-05T19:48:59  <BlueMatt> so action to our army of devoted full-time code-reviwers? :p
475 2016-05-05T19:49:02  <wumpus> (haven't read it yet)
476 2016-05-05T19:49:07  <morcos> too much happening.  we need to clone ourselves.  at least wumpus
477 2016-05-05T19:49:11  <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: when will the PR be up?
478 2016-05-05T19:49:12  <BlueMatt> morcos: yea, that
479 2016-05-05T19:49:17  <NicolasDorier> will read it. It takes me more time than most of you to understand it, can't say anything meaningful about it after reading it for 10min :p
480 2016-05-05T19:49:23  <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: are you just waiting on feedback?
481 2016-05-05T19:49:28  <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: I could do that this week...
482 2016-05-05T19:49:29  <wumpus> #action read bluematt's compact block bip
483 2016-05-05T19:49:32  <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: mostly
484 2016-05-05T19:49:34  <wumpus> any URL?
485 2016-05-05T19:49:40  <NicolasDorier> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012624.html ?
486 2016-05-05T19:49:48  <BlueMatt> wumpus: https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bips/blob/master/bip-TODO.mediawiki
487 2016-05-05T19:49:49  <wumpus> #link https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012624.html
488 2016-05-05T19:50:01  <wumpus> #link https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bips/blob/master/bip-TODO.mediawiki
489 2016-05-05T19:50:37  <wumpus> ok, any other topics?
490 2016-05-05T19:51:52  <gmaxwell> Sounds like no.
491 2016-05-05T19:52:12  <wumpus> hey not everyone is a fast typer :)
492 2016-05-05T19:52:16  <wumpus> but indeed seems no
493 2016-05-05T19:52:23  <NicolasDorier> well it's 4am here ! :p
494 2016-05-05T19:52:40  <NicolasDorier> 5 sorry
495 2016-05-05T19:52:46  <wumpus> #endmeeting
496 2016-05-05T19:52:46  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu May  5 19:52:46 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
497 2016-05-05T19:52:46  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-05-05-19.01.html
498 2016-05-05T19:52:46  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-05-05-19.01.txt
499 2016-05-05T19:52:46  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-05-05-19.01.log.html
500 2016-05-05T19:52:47  <jonasschnelli> Japan people work always!
501 2016-05-05T19:52:58  <NicolasDorier> jonasschnelli: not this week figure out
502 2016-05-05T19:52:59  <BlueMatt> hey, we're early!
503 2016-05-05T19:53:03  <NicolasDorier> this is golden week :p
504 2016-05-05T19:53:07  <wumpus> yes it's an inconvenient time for japan
505 2016-05-05T19:53:56  <morcos> cfields: sorry if you guys have been going over all this GBT stuff already..  i tried looking through the code and BIP PR's but seems like there is a bunch of detailed GBT stuff in there that has pretty much nothing to do with how most miners use it as far as i can tell
506 2016-05-05T19:54:33  <morcos> is the problem that miners will replace the coinbase entirely, because the commitment won't actually change if the miners aren't doing witness txs right, so as long as they kept the output, i dont' think they should care
507 2016-05-05T19:54:45  <cfields> morcos: np. It's fresh on my mind because i looked at it yesterday/today, otherwise I'd be clueless
508 2016-05-05T19:55:10  <sipa> back
509 2016-05-05T19:55:15  <jonasschnelli> landed?
510 2016-05-05T19:55:26  <cfields> morcos: no, either way, miners will be using what bitcoind provides. We're not talking about modifications here
511 2016-05-05T19:55:31  <morcos> sipa: segwit activated on testnet while you were gone.  pretty awesome huh
512 2016-05-05T19:55:58  <cfields> (er, "will be using what bitcoind provides" for the sake of this discussion)
513 2016-05-05T19:56:11  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
514 2016-05-05T19:56:21  <sipa> jonasschnelli: yes, sfo
515 2016-05-05T19:56:28  <morcos> cfields: yes i understand that we have narrowed the discussion to that case (although since the PR's are not narrowed to that case, they are harder to get through)
516 2016-05-05T19:56:52  <sdaftuar> so to clarify: bitcoind will be including a coinbase tx with a valid commitment in response to gbt, right?
517 2016-05-05T19:57:34  <sipa> sdaftuar: if there is at least one witness transaction in the block, and there is no commitment already
518 2016-05-05T19:57:38  <sipa> (i think)
519 2016-05-05T19:57:44  <sdaftuar> sipa: agreed
520 2016-05-05T19:57:46  <morcos> what i'm asking is why in that case is it necessary for the miner to be segwit aware?  changing the coinbase doesn't change the commitment, but i'm guessing the problem is that miners override all the coinbase outputs and so that commitment will be lost, and so bitcoind would have to do more work to add it back in and recalc the merkle for the header
521 2016-05-05T19:58:28  *** BashCo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522 2016-05-05T19:58:30  <gmaxwell> morcos: norma gbt right now has no coinbase transaction in it.
523 2016-05-05T19:58:30  <sdaftuar> ^ is morcos' guess here the issue?
524 2016-05-05T19:58:46  <gmaxwell> normal*
525 2016-05-05T20:00:33  *** BashCo has quit IRC
526 2016-05-05T20:01:57  <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: ah.  i am just now seeing where that coinbase gets stripped out of the response
527 2016-05-05T20:02:34  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
528 2016-05-05T20:03:02  <cfields> right, what gmaxwell said. miners insert the coinbase. but old miners don't know to insert the extra txout.
529 2016-05-05T20:03:55  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
530 2016-05-05T20:04:02  <sdaftuar> ok understood now.  so the idea would be to add a mode where CreateNewBlock just doesn't pick witness transactions, which old miners could use?
531 2016-05-05T20:04:15  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
532 2016-05-05T20:04:27  <cfields> if you only give them non-witness tx's, they'll continue to function fine. if they opt-in for the new serialization, no need to filter
533 2016-05-05T20:04:33  <cfields> sdaftuar: right.
534 2016-05-05T20:04:34  <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: right, and that mode would be default unless a special flag was sent.
535 2016-05-05T20:04:40  <sdaftuar> got it
536 2016-05-05T20:05:03  <gmaxwell> meaning that there is a guarenteed way to deploy with no mining infra updates.
537 2016-05-05T20:05:31  <sdaftuar> yep
538 2016-05-05T20:05:56  <cfields> but also a false sense of security while testing. so that's why i'd like to have the opt-in ready for miners to turn on asap
539 2016-05-05T20:07:10  <morcos> yes this makes sense to me now too.  but INCREDIBLY frustrating.  we have to rewrite the API for minings. it's absurd to have all this consensus critical logic outside of bitcoind by default.
540 2016-05-05T20:08:27  <morcos> sdaftuar points out that extra nonce makes that hard to fix
541 2016-05-05T20:10:23  <morcos> cfields: so is there a PR that does what you're suggesting?
542 2016-05-05T20:10:57  <cfields> morcos: afaik there's no implementation of the BIP yet.
543 2016-05-05T20:11:07  <cfields> luke-jr: have you coded something up, or should I jump on it?
544 2016-05-05T20:11:16  <cfields> (sorry, proposed BIP changes)
545 2016-05-05T20:12:56  <cfields> morcos: to be more specific: the bip changes are PR'd, but the specific segwit case isn't implemented yet afaik
546 2016-05-05T20:12:58  <cfields> sec for link
547 2016-05-05T20:13:19  <cfields> morcos: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7935
548 2016-05-05T20:13:37  <morcos> yeah i saw that, but i meant the code that only selects non witness txs for the block
549 2016-05-05T20:14:20  <cfields> i'm assuming no
550 2016-05-05T20:23:14  *** MrHodl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
551 2016-05-05T20:27:23  <GitHub180> [bitcoin] kazcw opened pull request #8011: don't run ThreadMessageHandler at lowered priority (master...priority) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8011
552 2016-05-05T20:30:53  <CodeShark> is meeting still underway?
553 2016-05-05T20:31:31  <CodeShark> guess not..sorry I couldn't make it
554 2016-05-05T20:33:02  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
555 2016-05-05T20:35:24  *** cloudnthings has quit IRC
556 2016-05-05T20:36:25  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
557 2016-05-05T20:37:31  *** schmidty has quit IRC
558 2016-05-05T20:37:54  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
559 2016-05-05T20:40:07  <tripleslash> CodeShark: [2016/05/05 14:52:47] <wumpus> #endmeeting
560 2016-05-05T20:40:13  <tripleslash> so about 50 minutes ago.
561 2016-05-05T20:43:43  <CodeShark> yeah, already read through the scrollback. thx :)
562 2016-05-05T20:48:52  *** GAit has quit IRC
563 2016-05-05T20:49:29  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
564 2016-05-05T20:52:13  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
565 2016-05-05T21:00:46  <gmaxwell> morcos: if only someone had suggested that any hardfork would mask out the constant zero bits in PREV in the header so miners could use it as nonce....
566 2016-05-05T21:04:05  *** TomMc has quit IRC
567 2016-05-05T21:07:18  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
568 2016-05-05T21:11:56  *** fengling has quit IRC
569 2016-05-05T21:17:34  *** TomMc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
570 2016-05-05T21:29:48  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
571 2016-05-05T21:31:10  <instagibbs> BlueMatt, I assume the XOR-adding scheme wraps around mod 2^64
572 2016-05-05T21:31:29  <BlueMatt> instagibbs: yes
573 2016-05-05T21:31:32  <BlueMatt> wait, no?
574 2016-05-05T21:31:35  <BlueMatt> wait, whats your question?
575 2016-05-05T21:31:46  <gmaxwell> he's asking if the addition is uint64_t addition, it is.
576 2016-05-05T21:31:58  <BlueMatt> instagibbs: please suggest better wording
577 2016-05-05T21:32:17  <BlueMatt> instagibbs: its this: https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoin/blob/udp/src/blockencodings.cpp#L37
578 2016-05-05T21:33:53  <instagibbs> wasn't too confusing, but it wasn't stated in the bip
579 2016-05-05T21:34:12  <instagibbs> (I'm also prejudiced from previous conversations so better to ask here)
580 2016-05-05T21:34:18  <gmaxwell> I have a constructive proof that this scheme is not optimal but I don't think anyone cares.
581 2016-05-05T21:36:54  <BlueMatt> yea, I'm not convinced its worth caring, and optimal versions are much more expensive
582 2016-05-05T21:37:02  <BlueMatt> considering we're running that on so many txn, I'd prefer not.....
583 2016-05-05T21:38:40  <gmaxwell> In an optimal scheme, for any to txids A and B, there should be a salt input C that makes them collide. If there is no such C, then someone trying to create collisions could avoid the pair A,B, and thus increase their success rate.  For this scheme, if A and B share the same even/oddness in each 64 bit word, then no C can make them collide. QED.
584 2016-05-05T21:38:53  <gmaxwell> Yes, I don't think it matters but it's useful to know that this exists.
585 2016-05-05T21:40:13  <instagibbs> just mentioning uint8 in the definition would be best, ill continue reading post family business
586 2016-05-05T21:40:30  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
587 2016-05-05T21:43:13  <roasbeef> nickler: Yeah, the test coverage on my PR leaves much to be desired. Most of the lingering TODO’s are related to increasing test coverage across the various packages (txscript+blockchain especially).
588 2016-05-05T21:43:55  <roasbeef> nickler: Once I get the tests in, I’ll be restructuring the commits as they’ve started to sprawl a bit as I’ve fixed bugs, tweaked API’s, etc. I’ve been busy with other non-bitcoin stuff (this whole graduating thing), but hope to get the PR to it’s final form (insert Frieza meme ;) ) in the next week or two.
589 2016-05-05T21:45:30  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
590 2016-05-05T21:55:26  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
591 2016-05-05T22:24:04  *** sipa has quit IRC
592 2016-05-05T22:24:10  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
593 2016-05-05T22:24:35  *** sipa is now known as Guest89961
594 2016-05-05T22:38:08  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
595 2016-05-05T22:42:36  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
596 2016-05-05T22:42:36  *** assder has quit IRC
597 2016-05-05T22:47:40  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
598 2016-05-05T22:50:02  *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
599 2016-05-05T22:54:09  *** TomMc has quit IRC
600 2016-05-05T23:06:16  <nickler> roasbeef: sounds great! My comment was not meant to be judging; the idea was to exchange tests between multiple implementations if possible. Let me know when you've worked on the PR again. Good luck with your graduating thing.
601 2016-05-05T23:09:52  *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602 2016-05-05T23:14:36  *** fengling has quit IRC
603 2016-05-05T23:15:34  *** murch has quit IRC
604 2016-05-05T23:17:36  <warren> A popular RPM package of Bitcoin uses this patch: https://togami.com/~warren/temp/2016/bitcoin-0.12.0-destchange.patch
605 2016-05-05T23:17:45  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
606 2016-05-05T23:18:09  <warren> To get rid of this patch what should we upstream?  Matt's guess was to add an optional parameter to an RPC
607 2016-05-05T23:19:02  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
608 2016-05-05T23:23:32  <roasbeef> nickler: No worries, I took no offense :). Great, I think there's a lot of value in exchanging tests across implementations. I plan to port over core's new json script, sighash and transaction tests to btcd. I'll contribute any additional cases I add upstream to core.
609 2016-05-05T23:30:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
610 2016-05-05T23:34:25  <GitHub80> [bitcoin] Tyler-Hardin opened pull request #8012: Qt: Delay user confirmation of send (master...send-delay) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8012