1 2017-12-30T00:04:51  *** YellowSphere has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  2 2017-12-30T00:06:57  *** cheese_ has quit IRC
  3 2017-12-30T00:14:35  *** YellowSphere has quit IRC
  4 2017-12-30T00:17:21  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  5 2017-12-30T00:24:15  *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
  6 2017-12-30T00:26:26  *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2017-12-30T00:27:28  *** jb55 has quit IRC
  8 2017-12-30T00:29:08  *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
  9 2017-12-30T00:32:03  *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2017-12-30T00:35:07  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2017-12-30T00:42:04  *** qwertzlcoatl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2017-12-30T00:44:33  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2017-12-30T00:54:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2017-12-30T00:55:25  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 15 2017-12-30T00:56:57  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2017-12-30T01:02:54  *** promag has quit IRC
 17 2017-12-30T01:16:47  *** synthetic11000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 18 2017-12-30T01:25:14  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 19 2017-12-30T02:02:00  *** belcher has quit IRC
 20 2017-12-30T02:18:08  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 21 2017-12-30T02:20:17  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 22 2017-12-30T02:25:57  *** qwertzlcoatl has quit IRC
 23 2017-12-30T02:30:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 24 2017-12-30T02:30:59  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
 25 2017-12-30T02:51:32  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 26 2017-12-30T03:01:13  *** xiedeacc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2017-12-30T03:03:11  *** synthetic11000 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 28 2017-12-30T03:10:02  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 29 2017-12-30T03:21:09  *** ^darkfire^ is now known as ^shartshow^
 30 2017-12-30T03:41:25  *** xiedeacc has quit IRC
 31 2017-12-30T04:33:20  *** Kozuch has quit IRC
 32 2017-12-30T04:41:18  *** ^shartshow^ is now known as ^kleptocoin^
 33 2017-12-30T04:45:30  *** ^kleptocoin^ is now known as alternativeminer
 34 2017-12-30T04:49:44  *** alternativeminer is now known as netpilot
 35 2017-12-30T05:05:45  *** netpilot is now known as ^ice9
 36 2017-12-30T05:08:29  *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2017-12-30T05:10:35  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 38 2017-12-30T05:13:44  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 39 2017-12-30T05:14:04  *** ^ice9 is now known as autopilot
 40 2017-12-30T05:14:19  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2017-12-30T05:18:27  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 42 2017-12-30T05:22:14  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 43 2017-12-30T05:26:44  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d9fdac130a5e...a332a7d5a152
 44 2017-12-30T05:26:44  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a3ac767 dongsamb: Fix string concatenation to os.path.join and add exception case
 45 2017-12-30T05:26:45  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a332a7d MarcoFalke: Merge #11291: Fix string concatenation to os.path.join and add exception case...
 46 2017-12-30T05:27:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #11291: Fix string concatenation to os.path.join and add exception case (master...Fix-PEP8-warnings) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11291
 47 2017-12-30T05:48:28  *** boblee has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 48 2017-12-30T05:52:07  *** boblee has quit IRC
 49 2017-12-30T05:52:08  *** boblee has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2017-12-30T06:08:34  *** go1111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2017-12-30T06:24:54  *** juscamarena has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 52 2017-12-30T06:28:55  *** xiedeacc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 53 2017-12-30T06:30:39  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2017-12-30T06:30:57  *** juscamarena has quit IRC
 55 2017-12-30T06:32:56  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
 56 2017-12-30T06:46:06  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
 57 2017-12-30T06:54:35  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2017-12-30T07:05:09  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 59 2017-12-30T07:20:17  *** soffi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 60 2017-12-30T07:49:48  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
 61 2017-12-30T08:13:35  *** t0adst00l has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2017-12-30T08:37:04  *** t0adst00l has quit IRC
 63 2017-12-30T08:40:14  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
 64 2017-12-30T08:40:26  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
 65 2017-12-30T08:40:30  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 66 2017-12-30T08:40:36  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2017-12-30T08:52:50  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 68 2017-12-30T08:56:49  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 69 2017-12-30T09:01:53  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
 70 2017-12-30T09:05:12  *** t0adst00l has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2017-12-30T09:23:43  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 72 2017-12-30T09:24:11  *** davec has quit IRC
 73 2017-12-30T09:32:10  *** t0adst00l has quit IRC
 74 2017-12-30T09:32:34  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 75 2017-12-30T09:37:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a332a7d5a152...efae3663a772
 76 2017-12-30T09:37:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6915f93 Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Update OpenBSD build instructions for 6.2...
 77 2017-12-30T09:37:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master efae366 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11984: doc: Update OpenBSD build instructions for 6.2 (cont'd)...
 78 2017-12-30T09:37:38  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11984: doc: Update OpenBSD build instructions for 6.2 (cont'd) (master...2017_12_openbsd_build_update) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11984
 79 2017-12-30T09:38:13  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2017-12-30T09:40:41  <fanquake> wumpus Good idea. The other two were more gui based anyways.
 81 2017-12-30T09:44:35  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 82 2017-12-30T09:51:05  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: oh no you didn't just #12026
 83 2017-12-30T09:51:06  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12026 | Prepare version scheme for 17.0 release by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #12026 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 84 2017-12-30T09:51:32  <wumpus> as if there aren't enough virtually irrelevant issues to fight about yet
 85 2017-12-30T09:52:34  <fanquake> I tried, and failed, to redirect traffic back to where the actual discussion has already happened.
 86 2017-12-30T09:52:48  <wumpus> yes now all the armchair devs are coming out of the woodwork
 87 2017-12-30T09:53:04  <wumpus> my versionining scheme is better than your versioining scheme!
 88 2017-12-30T09:53:22  <luke-jr> seems pointless to have a PR for such a trivial thing without consensus to do it
 89 2017-12-30T09:53:25  <fanquake> Red, white or blue paint?
 90 2017-12-30T09:53:34  <wumpus> and people reading way too much in it
 91 2017-12-30T09:53:39  <wumpus> OH SO BITCOIN ISN'T BETA ANYMORE?
 92 2017-12-30T09:53:41  <wumpus> whieeeee
 93 2017-12-30T09:53:59  <fanquake> I assume this is the point everyone has been waiting for so that can actually deploy to production...
 94 2017-12-30T09:54:12  <wumpus> unleash the monster
 95 2017-12-30T09:54:20  <sipa> i tried to clarify things on twitter a bit... but i may have made things worse :(
 96 2017-12-30T09:54:40  <aj> that got linked on reddit even https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7mp7md/bitcoin_core_is_preparing_planning_the_version/
 97 2017-12-30T09:54:58  <wumpus> yes he added a disclaimer "EDIT: Obviously, this does not mean Bitcoin Core is all of a sudden less experimental than before.". Of course, such people don't read disclaimers.
 98 2017-12-30T09:55:05  <fanquake> "While these types of posts do not get the attention they deserve" . No, they get far more attention than they deserve.
 99 2017-12-30T09:55:16  <wumpus> they get attention
100 2017-12-30T09:55:20  <wumpus> while we still don't have segwit wallet
101 2017-12-30T09:55:29  <sipa> https://twitter.com/pwuille/status/946689982034477056
102 2017-12-30T09:55:44  <fanquake> sipa clearly you
103 2017-12-30T09:56:04  <fanquake> 've done something wrong, thats the first tweet of yours I've seen with < 1000 hearts..
104 2017-12-30T09:56:18  <sipa> fanquake: it's buried deep in a thread
105 2017-12-30T09:56:26  <sipa> but hey i got some nice in-person review from BlueMatt yesterday on #11304
106 2017-12-30T09:56:27  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11304 | Вообще не понимаю как установить на linux kali · Issue #11304 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
107 2017-12-30T09:56:32  <sipa> no, not on that
108 2017-12-30T09:56:35  <luke-jr> hmm, I kinda like that comment suggesting we aim for 1.0 at the 10 year anniversary :p
109 2017-12-30T09:56:40  <wumpus> I mean all these people are clamoring for TRADE SIGNALS
110 2017-12-30T09:56:44  <wumpus> this has nothing to do with development
111 2017-12-30T09:56:59  <wumpus> this is more like with alts, where the devs make a big announcement and the price is pumped
112 2017-12-30T09:57:07  <sipa> but hey i got some nice in-person review from BlueMatt yesterday on #11403
113 2017-12-30T09:57:12  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11403 | SegWit wallet support by sipa · Pull Request #11403 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
114 2017-12-30T09:57:28  <wumpus> that's why they want the version number to bump. THey won't even be running bitcoin core, most probably.
115 2017-12-30T09:57:59  <fanquake> Better send some anti signal
116 2017-12-30T09:58:18  <sipa> how about we change the versioning scheme to 0.0.17?
117 2017-12-30T09:58:21  * sipa hides
118 2017-12-30T09:58:22  <luke-jr> lol
119 2017-12-30T09:58:35  <aj> release 18.0 without telling anyone whether it's year based or not
120 2017-12-30T09:58:40  <sipa> i can make the same argument
121 2017-12-30T09:59:01  <sipa> "I support dropping the final 0 in, as it's clearly redundant"
122 2017-12-30T09:59:16  <fanquake> The only thing I don't want to see are named releases.
123 2017-12-30T09:59:19  <wumpus> it's just pointless to argue about, sucking up developer time in arguments
124 2017-12-30T09:59:23  <aj> sipa: any summary on the in-person review?
125 2017-12-30T09:59:31  <wumpus> fanquake: lol
126 2017-12-30T09:59:31  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
127 2017-12-30T09:59:51  *** jezeba has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
128 2017-12-30T09:59:51  <fanquake> I thought everyone at that conference was too busy hitting that red button
129 2017-12-30T09:59:54  <wumpus> fanquake: nonono I think I"ve read at least one post proposing those, even
130 2017-12-30T09:59:56  <sipa> aj: i learned that some of BlueMatt's concerns were legitimate; BlueMatt learned that some of his concerns weren't :)
131 2017-12-30T10:00:06  <luke-jr> let's name the next release "fanquake"
132 2017-12-30T10:00:13  <fanquake> please no
133 2017-12-30T10:00:18  <luke-jr> :p
134 2017-12-30T10:00:24  <sipa> (all relating to import/downgrade/restore scenarios, and nothing that a rescan with a later version can't fix)
135 2017-12-30T10:00:41  <midnightmagic> "complaints to fanquake"
136 2017-12-30T10:01:05  <sipa> wumpus: i think we should just do it, or not. i don't care either way - but letting it linger won't help
137 2017-12-30T10:01:16  <midnightmagic> and then just replace the name with someone random in this channel each point release
138 2017-12-30T10:01:31  <wumpus> sipa: I won't touch it with a 10 foot pole
139 2017-12-30T10:01:44  <sipa> fair
140 2017-12-30T10:01:52  * sipa hands wumpus the 11 foot pole
141 2017-12-30T10:02:04  <wumpus> I'm not going to NACK it, but let me be clear I think it's ill-advised
142 2017-12-30T10:02:08  <aj> wumpus: btw, i've been poking at #11862 more. if we make it so 'port=1234' only affects mainnet and you have to say '[regtest]\nport=1234' to change the regtest port (or rpcport, etc) i thought it might make sense to allow you to just say 'regtest=1 \n port=1234' without having to have the [regtest] section header. but there's a whole bunch of corner cases there that make it seem not worthwhile (and
143 2017-12-30T10:02:08  <aj> possibly too hard to document accurately)
144 2017-12-30T10:02:09  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11862 | [concept] Network specific conf sections by ajtowns · Pull Request #11862 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
145 2017-12-30T10:02:22  <fanquake> Then lets just close everything, and worry about segwit wallet
146 2017-12-30T10:02:45  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
147 2017-12-30T10:02:48  <wumpus> aj: I don't think that's worth it, no
148 2017-12-30T10:02:54  <aj> sipa: that sounds positive!
149 2017-12-30T10:03:13  <wumpus> aj: I'd prefer to make the logic simple but flexible
150 2017-12-30T10:03:25  <wumpus> aj: adding [regtest] header is simple to understand and parse
151 2017-12-30T10:03:31  <sipa> aj: i'll comment on the PR when i adress the things
152 2017-12-30T10:03:59  <sipa> aj: wasn't there also support for regtest.port=1234 ?
153 2017-12-30T10:04:16  <aj> sipa: yes, [regtest] foo=bar and regtest.foo=bar are equivalent in boost config parsing
154 2017-12-30T10:04:28  <wumpus> aj: most people won't even be using the test network and regtest, adding corner cases here just adds corner cases for corner cases' sake
155 2017-12-30T10:04:38  <wumpus> aj: if it comes for free with boost, fair enough
156 2017-12-30T10:05:58  <fanquake> wumpus re boost #12027 is a pretty trivial merge that removes some confusion errors from the brew install log
157 2017-12-30T10:05:59  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12027 | [Docs] Remove boost --c++ flag from osx build instructions by fernandezpablo85 · Pull Request #12027 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
158 2017-12-30T10:06:11  <fanquake> commit message just need ammending
159 2017-12-30T10:06:22  <aj> wumpus: the other issue that i'm hitting now is that regtest.datadir doesn't work -- datadir is decided before the chain is selected. would be a bit more invasive (but ultimately simplify things a bit) to change that
160 2017-12-30T10:07:02  <wumpus> aj: yes there are tons of edge cases around precedence and order of options, with regard to the -datadir and -conf and -regtest/-testnet options
161 2017-12-30T10:07:12  <wumpus> aj: let's try to keep the order there the same
162 2017-12-30T10:07:50  <wumpus> aj: at least don't add that to the scope of the PR
163 2017-12-30T10:08:17  <aj> wumpus: okay, less invasive it is
164 2017-12-30T10:08:18  <wumpus> the current order works pretty well, you can use -conf to select a configuration and set a datadir in there, as well as a netwerk
165 2017-12-30T10:08:36  <wumpus> you can use -datadir to select a datadir and use the bitcoin.conf inside, which can also set a network
166 2017-12-30T10:08:42  <wumpus> (this is used for the tests)
167 2017-12-30T10:09:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
168 2017-12-30T10:09:38  <wumpus> less invasive is better certainly as long as we don't have full test coverage for these edge cases
169 2017-12-30T10:10:07  <wumpus> also it would mean all kinds of scenarios would need to be re-thought
170 2017-12-30T10:10:48  <aj> wumpus: oh, any idea which options to make network-specific? i've got -wallet and -addnode, and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11741#issuecomment-347458820 suggested -port -bind -rpcport and -rpcbind ?
171 2017-12-30T10:11:01  <wumpus> fanquake: hehe closing all PRs but segwit wallet (and related things) would make a point, at least
172 2017-12-30T10:11:39  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
173 2017-12-30T10:11:47  <wumpus> aj: I think that's a good set to start with. THe general credo would be: all options that have different default based on network.
174 2017-12-30T10:12:01  <aj> oh good point
175 2017-12-30T10:12:04  <fanquake> If GitHub had better tools for managing project "workflow" we could actually make something like that happen.
176 2017-12-30T10:13:01  *** jezeba has quit IRC
177 2017-12-30T10:18:54  *** finkan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
178 2017-12-30T10:19:12  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
179 2017-12-30T10:21:27  <luke-jr> wumpus: not a positive point, IMO
180 2017-12-30T10:21:56  <wumpus> luke-jr: hm?
181 2017-12-30T10:23:02  <luke-jr> wumpus: the only point I could see from closing all PRs besides a few, would be that some people are trying to force the priority for other people.
182 2017-12-30T10:23:31  <aj> fanquake: it's got tools you can use to make tools to manage workflows at least? did you see https://gist.github.com/ajtowns/bdc91590471559b5c73682fdfa712b15 ?
183 2017-12-30T10:23:53  <wumpus> luke-jr: I was just kidding
184 2017-12-30T10:25:01  <fanquake> aj No, will read through it
185 2017-12-30T10:26:13  *** m0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
186 2017-12-30T10:27:39  <wumpus> luke-jr: I think it'd be an awful idea too
187 2017-12-30T10:35:58  *** Jaybaby has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
188 2017-12-30T10:44:35  <midnightmagic> you could hire a temporary transition person whose primary job would be to close all PRs, then act as a strawman you could punch the crap out of while pretending to get rid of them..
189 2017-12-30T10:47:22  <wumpus> at some point the project will outgrow the github PR way of working in any case
190 2017-12-30T10:47:41  <wumpus> e.g. stuff like http://blog.ffwll.ch/2017/08/github-why-cant-host-the-kernel.html
191 2017-12-30T10:47:47  <wumpus> but we're not there yet
192 2017-12-30T10:48:02  <wumpus> I think
193 2017-12-30T10:51:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] vajdaz opened pull request #12054: Minimize to tray functionality only on Windows (master...win-only-tray) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12054
194 2017-12-30T10:57:04  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: Yeah, sorry about that. Someone brought it to twitter, which lead to the fights. I assumed that step was uncontroversial. But meh, better close it.
195 2017-12-30T10:57:15  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: no, let's merge it
196 2017-12-30T10:57:33  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: just get it over with
197 2017-12-30T10:57:52  <meshcollider> then people can stop arguing about it yeah
198 2017-12-30T10:58:02  <wumpus> I'm sorry for contributing to the pain around it
199 2017-12-30T10:58:24  <luke-jr> merge what?
200 2017-12-30T10:58:41  <wumpus> #12026
201 2017-12-30T10:58:43  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12026 | Prepare version scheme for 17.0 release by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #12026 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
202 2017-12-30T10:58:46  <luke-jr> no, that's stupid
203 2017-12-30T10:59:15  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
204 2017-12-30T11:00:29  <wumpus> I mean it's clear that no one likes the current versioning scheme, and people want to change it, we're never going to agree on what to change it to, so let's go with this simple change.
205 2017-12-30T11:00:50  *** finkan has quit IRC
206 2017-12-30T11:00:57  <luke-jr> the current one is fine, and certainly much better than that
207 2017-12-30T11:01:11  <wumpus> sigh
208 2017-12-30T11:01:48  <meshcollider> its really just a number, who cares, its not symbolic of any major change, its just to save the stupid 0 at the front all the time
209 2017-12-30T11:02:01  <wumpus> yep
210 2017-12-30T11:02:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/efae3663a772...db7eba6169b6
211 2017-12-30T11:02:30  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master faa7ecf MarcoFalke: Prepare version scheme for 17.0 release
212 2017-12-30T11:02:31  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master db7eba6 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12026: Prepare version scheme for 17.0 release...
213 2017-12-30T11:02:34  <luke-jr> meshcollider: the 0 at the front indicates the current immaturity of the project
214 2017-12-30T11:02:49  <luke-jr> when things get to a sensible state, it should become a 1.x.y.z
215 2017-12-30T11:02:57  <meshcollider> btw luke-jr I liked your consensus versions page on the wiki
216 2017-12-30T11:02:58  <wumpus> luke-jr: no one is making that decision
217 2017-12-30T11:03:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12026: Prepare version scheme for 17.0 release (master...Mf1712-version17) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12026
218 2017-12-30T11:03:13  <wumpus> luke-jr: no one will ever agree whether 'bitcoin is ready'
219 2017-12-30T11:03:20  <wumpus> luke-jr: we already get too many fights about that
220 2017-12-30T11:03:21  <luke-jr> wumpus: why not?
221 2017-12-30T11:03:44  <wumpus> with some people calling it completely useless in current state and others saying it's done don't change it anymore
222 2017-12-30T11:03:49  <wumpus> and a whole spectrum in between
223 2017-12-30T11:03:56  <meshcollider> wumpus: shouldnt that have waited til after 0.16 branches off
224 2017-12-30T11:04:01  <luke-jr> and even if it were true, that's certainly no reason to set it to a 16-past-readiness stage when it clearly isn't
225 2017-12-30T11:04:23  <sipa> wumpus: that wasn't intended to be merged now...
226 2017-12-30T11:05:18  <sipa> (the PR also changes the number from 15 to 16)
227 2017-12-30T11:05:20  <wumpus> there is no readyness stage, there won't be no readyness stage
228 2017-12-30T11:05:28  <fanquake> "trades intensify"
229 2017-12-30T11:05:48  <wumpus> sipa: oh shit
230 2017-12-30T11:06:01  <meshcollider> wumpus: heh but now master will build as 16.99 instead of 0.15.99
231 2017-12-30T11:06:21  <meshcollider> we skipped 0.16 release, segwit wallet is now 0.17 ;)
232 2017-12-30T11:06:38  <sipa> meshcollider: no, 17.0
233 2017-12-30T11:07:11  *** lvmbdv has quit IRC
234 2017-12-30T11:07:18  <luke-jr> wumpus: the only reason to drop the 0 is for the same marketting/pumping nonsense you were denouncing earlier
235 2017-12-30T11:07:22  <meshcollider> sipa: oops, yes lol
236 2017-12-30T11:07:49  <wumpus> luke-jr: which no one agreed to at the time
237 2017-12-30T11:08:21  <wumpus> going to force-push to previous master
238 2017-12-30T11:08:24  <luke-jr> ⁈
239 2017-12-30T11:09:11  <MarcoFalke> s/16/15/ && git commit
240 2017-12-30T11:09:43  <luke-jr> wumpus: so why merge pumping nonsense just because nobody explicitly agreed in the last 2 hours?
241 2017-12-30T11:10:15  <sipa> it's just dropping a stupid zero that has no meaning
242 2017-12-30T11:10:58  <sipa> yes, some people will misinterpreted as sign
243 2017-12-30T11:10:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj force-pushed master from db7eba6 to efae366: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master
244 2017-12-30T11:11:04  <luke-jr> sipa: it has meaning
245 2017-12-30T11:11:12  <sipa> the alternative is that we never get rid of the 0
246 2017-12-30T11:11:28  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: sorry for the inconvenience, please open a new PR
247 2017-12-30T11:11:30  *** sengehest has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
248 2017-12-30T11:11:33  <luke-jr> we get rid of the 0 when it's reasonable to bump to 1.0..
249 2017-12-30T11:11:48  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: No rush. Can wait until next year
250 2017-12-30T11:11:51  <luke-jr> like any other sane versioning
251 2017-12-30T11:11:55  <sipa> luke-jr: the whole point is that there is no "reasonable" time for that
252 2017-12-30T11:11:58  <meshcollider> luke-jr: there will be arguments whenever anyone suggests that though
253 2017-12-30T11:12:00  <luke-jr> sipa: but there is
254 2017-12-30T11:12:01  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: I think it has to be done now
255 2017-12-30T11:12:01  <sipa> we have date based releades
256 2017-12-30T11:12:21  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: either we do it, or we never do it, I think there's a good point to not let this linger
257 2017-12-30T11:12:30  <meshcollider> MarcoFalke: next year is in less than 24 hours in NZ ;)
258 2017-12-30T11:12:38  <sipa> i just had a twitter fight with someone who assumed that bitcoin core could not be "ready" until it integrated lightning
259 2017-12-30T11:12:49  <luke-jr> even if there may be arguments when it's reasonable, it clearly ISN'T reasonable TODAY
260 2017-12-30T11:12:50  <meshcollider> sipa: heh yep I saw that
261 2017-12-30T11:13:04  <sipa> luke-jr: it's as reasonable today as it will ever b
262 2017-12-30T11:13:20  <sipa> everyone has different requirements for ready, and no software is ever finished
263 2017-12-30T11:13:28  <luke-jr> sipa: today it's often that users get transactions stuck and beyond simple recovery; that's not 1.0 quality
264 2017-12-30T11:13:39  <luke-jr> today we have no way to restore wallet backups
265 2017-12-30T11:13:42  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2017-12-30T11:13:42  <wumpus> luke-jr: that will not improve from one day to another
267 2017-12-30T11:13:50  <luke-jr> today we have no simple way to automate safe backups
268 2017-12-30T11:13:50  <wumpus> luke-jr: there is not one *point* at which that will all be true
269 2017-12-30T11:13:58  <sipa> and then there will be another issue
270 2017-12-30T11:14:05  <sipa> no software is ever perfect
271 2017-12-30T11:14:15  <wumpus> and no one will decide on that, no one wil stake their reputation on 'bitcoin is 1.0 quality now'
272 2017-12-30T11:14:19  <luke-jr> point is that today, Core is not usable by a normal person
273 2017-12-30T11:14:20  <wumpus> sipa: indeed
274 2017-12-30T11:14:26  <wumpus> define 'normal person'
275 2017-12-30T11:14:30  <sipa> luke-jr: sure
276 2017-12-30T11:14:35  <sipa> totally agree
277 2017-12-30T11:14:45  <sipa> it's also not the right choice for many
278 2017-12-30T11:14:45  <wumpus> will it ever be usable by everyone? I don't think so
279 2017-12-30T11:14:46  <luke-jr> wumpus: pick a random person off the street
280 2017-12-30T11:14:52  <wumpus> that's not a requirement
281 2017-12-30T11:15:24  <wumpus> you're just making up things now. Can a random person from the street program the linux kernel directly?
282 2017-12-30T11:15:35  <luke-jr> we're not talking about programming
283 2017-12-30T11:15:38  <luke-jr> we're talking about usage
284 2017-12-30T11:15:39  <wumpus> bitcoin core is just the infrastructre
285 2017-12-30T11:15:46  <sipa> would you argue that FPFA designer software cannot be 1.0 before a random person on the street can use it?
286 2017-12-30T11:15:49  <luke-jr> random person off the street can certainly boot and use a Linux LiveCD
287 2017-12-30T11:15:51  <wumpus> there is tons of software aimed at providing better ui and whatnot
288 2017-12-30T11:15:59  <wumpus> sipa: exactly.
289 2017-12-30T11:16:01  <sipa> i think it's more than infrastructure
290 2017-12-30T11:16:12  <luke-jr> Bitcoin Core is an end-user application, not a developer application
291 2017-12-30T11:16:17  <sipa> but it's not for everyone
292 2017-12-30T11:16:20  <wumpus> luke-jr: then what is RPC for?
293 2017-12-30T11:16:27  <luke-jr> if nearly everyone doesn't use a full node, Bitcoin doesn't work
294 2017-12-30T11:16:32  <luke-jr> wumpus: RPC isn't all of Core
295 2017-12-30T11:16:48  <luke-jr> I'd have no problem with calling bitcoind >=1.0
296 2017-12-30T11:16:50  <sipa> yes, so?
297 2017-12-30T11:16:51  <wumpus> I'm really so  tired of this
298 2017-12-30T11:17:26  <wumpus> sure, let's version bitcoind separately... that will make things easier
299 2017-12-30T11:18:01  <luke-jr> there's always the "don't fix what isn't broken" option
300 2017-12-30T11:18:21  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
301 2017-12-30T11:18:52  <sipa> the 0 in front is redundant at best, and confusing at worst
302 2017-12-30T11:20:34  <luke-jr> strongly disagree. it has a meaning and a purpose
303 2017-12-30T11:20:44  <wumpus> no, it has no purpose
304 2017-12-30T11:21:06  <wumpus> it will never be increased
305 2017-12-30T11:21:16  <meshcollider> and the only ones who would really understand the "meaning and purpose" of a version number in general are other developers... no end user will read this deeply into it
306 2017-12-30T11:21:25  <luke-jr> you're talking about increasing it NOW, so that argument makes no sense
307 2017-12-30T11:21:32  <wumpus> we're just removing the initial 0
308 2017-12-30T11:21:37  <wumpus> not *increasing* anything
309 2017-12-30T11:22:24  <meshcollider> because we actually refer to the second number as the "major" version number, what is the 0 even called?
310 2017-12-30T11:22:37  <meshcollider> the supermajor version number
311 2017-12-30T11:22:43  <sipa> "the zero"
312 2017-12-30T11:23:08  <wumpus> +1 for "the zero"
313 2017-12-30T11:23:18  <luke-jr> who refers to the second as "major"? that'd be incorrect terminology
314 2017-12-30T11:23:23  <wumpus> we all do
315 2017-12-30T11:23:24  <sipa> everyone
316 2017-12-30T11:23:26  <wumpus> except for you, maybe
317 2017-12-30T11:23:28  <sipa> seriously.
318 2017-12-30T11:23:35  <sipa> we have major releases every 6 months
319 2017-12-30T11:23:41  <wumpus> yes
320 2017-12-30T11:23:45  <sipa> minor releases for bigfixes and softforks
321 2017-12-30T11:24:12  <sipa> i like bigfixes and i cannot lie
322 2017-12-30T11:24:21  <meshcollider> e.g. quote from #11449 "Like for previous major releases I've added 6 months to the previous release schedule"
323 2017-12-30T11:24:22  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11449 | Release schedule for 0.16.0 · Issue #11449 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
324 2017-12-30T11:24:57  <luke-jr> bugfixes aren't minor releases in normal versioning
325 2017-12-30T11:24:59  *** cplusboi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
326 2017-12-30T11:25:18  <meshcollider> sipa: lol
327 2017-12-30T11:25:47  <wumpus> we've always used that terminology
328 2017-12-30T11:26:03  <sipa> luke-jr: yet that is how we've all been referring to it
329 2017-12-30T11:26:06  <wumpus> so that matches better withremoving the 0
330 2017-12-30T11:27:17  <meshcollider> we'll stick with the 6-monthly release schedule though won't we, rather than converting fully to semver?
331 2017-12-30T11:28:01  <wumpus> what, you want to change the release schedule too now?
332 2017-12-30T11:28:18  <meshcollider> heh no that's what I'm checking
333 2017-12-30T11:28:38  <wumpus> oh right, sorry
334 2017-12-30T11:28:52  <wumpus> yes, I think it makes sense to stick to that, it has worked pretty well
335 2017-12-30T11:29:52  <wumpus> we don't need to change everything around just because a few people (most not even involved with the project) are screaming
336 2017-12-30T11:30:20  <meshcollider> Agreed, it's just that semver has come up in discussion over these version numbers quite a lot, so people might expect us to stick to it more strongly now
337 2017-12-30T11:30:39  <wumpus> what in 'semver' rules out a 6 month release schedule anyway?
338 2017-12-30T11:30:45  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #12055: Prepare version scheme for upcoming release [take 2] (master...Mf1712-versionDropRedundantZero) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12055
339 2017-12-30T11:31:28  <meshcollider> semver would only require a major release each time a breaking API change occurred, so you'd be limited to merging a breaking change once every 6 months ;)
340 2017-12-30T11:31:44  <wumpus> don't most open source projects have a more or less tick-tock release schedule?
341 2017-12-30T11:32:07  <wumpus> what is 'breaking' in this context?
342 2017-12-30T11:32:12  <fanquake> I don't think we really gain much by trying to stick to some arbitrary requirements. It would seem like core isn't exactly like "other" projects.
343 2017-12-30T11:32:18  <wumpus> changing RPC interface?
344 2017-12-30T11:32:25  <wumpus> well, every major version wil qualify for that one :)
345 2017-12-30T11:32:27  <meshcollider> wumpus: yes, external API
346 2017-12-30T11:32:48  <wumpus> even if there are no P2P and consensus changes
347 2017-12-30T11:33:08  <meshcollider> wumpus: internal changes do not matter for semver, they are patch releases. Minor changes are backwards compatible extensions of the API, and major are breaking changes to the API (no matter how small, technically)
348 2017-12-30T11:33:30  <wumpus> ok...
349 2017-12-30T11:33:34  <fanquake> To think about this a bit differently. What would the release schedule look like if core github had 2 or 3x the contributors for review and code that it currently has?
350 2017-12-30T11:33:54  <wumpus> it might be possible to do more frequent releases
351 2017-12-30T11:34:02  <wumpus> e.g. 3 month schedule instead of 6
352 2017-12-30T11:34:39  <luke-jr> meshcollider: SemVer is not exclusively about interfaces.. any new functionality warrants a minor bump
353 2017-12-30T11:35:19  <wumpus> but still I think the only sane way to do releases is to have them time based
354 2017-12-30T11:35:32  <luke-jr> wumpus: I think everyone likes thaat
355 2017-12-30T11:36:01  <fanquake> I agree, and I think that will become even more "likeable" over time
356 2017-12-30T11:36:03  <luke-jr> wumpus: doing SemVer right would simply mean we'd go from 1.0 to 1.1 if we were backward compatible, and to 2.0 if breaking compatibility
357 2017-12-30T11:36:14  <luke-jr> nothing to do with the schedule
358 2017-12-30T11:36:16  <meshcollider> luke-jr: It *may* increase minor but not *must*
359 2017-12-30T11:36:30  <luke-jr> meshcollider: patch-level increases must only be fixes, though\
360 2017-12-30T11:36:35  <wumpus> luke-jr: but breaking *what* interface? we have many interfaces to contend with, for semver we'd have to define what interfaces count and which do not
361 2017-12-30T11:36:37  <fanquake> Longer term releases only somethimes "suck" now because big new features can get delayed.
362 2017-12-30T11:37:01  <luke-jr> wumpus: the root of this problem is that we haven't modularised yet (which is yet another reason to stick to 0.x)
363 2017-12-30T11:37:03  <MarcoFalke> In the longer term, we need versions for RPC, wallet, gui, etc anyway
364 2017-12-30T11:37:08  <meshcollider> yeah trying to version core as a whole is too unwieldy tbh
365 2017-12-30T11:37:11  <MarcoFalke> That has nothing to do with Bitcoin Core version
366 2017-12-30T11:37:15  <luke-jr> wumpus: once modularised, each component can have its own version, which makes things a lot more obvious
367 2017-12-30T11:37:19  <wumpus> fanquake: yes, indeed, that's the drawback of the long duration between releases, on the other hand it makes sure things are pretty well tested on mater usually before they end up in a relesae
368 2017-12-30T11:37:20  <meshcollider> indeed
369 2017-12-30T11:37:29  <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: it's harder to go backward
370 2017-12-30T11:37:58  <wumpus> we have a wallet version, and network protocol version, but yes no RPC api version. I agree those are separate from the software proejct version.
371 2017-12-30T11:38:08  <aj> sipa: hmm. "i like bugfixes and i cannot lie: your other branches don't compile. 'cause when a patch comes in and claims it make it run fast and the travis checks pass, it gets merged"
372 2017-12-30T11:38:09  <wumpus> this is also why I closed the PR adding the bitcoin core version to libconsensus pc
373 2017-12-30T11:38:32  <wumpus> libconsensus should probably be versioned differently
374 2017-12-30T11:38:53  <meshcollider> yes libconsensus should definitely follow semver because it is a library
375 2017-12-30T11:39:03  <wumpus> yep
376 2017-12-30T11:39:08  <wumpus> for libraries it makes perfect sense
377 2017-12-30T11:39:21  <wumpus> for the rest it's just useless splitting hairs
378 2017-12-30T11:40:19  <sipa> aj: haha
379 2017-12-30T11:45:07  <luke-jr> at least the "drop the leading zero" approach enables me to just ignore it and keep using a leading zero. ;)
380 2017-12-30T11:46:33  <meshcollider> Instead of dropping the zero, let's just rename _CLIENT_VERSION_MAJOR to _CLIENT_VERSION_THE_ZERO then ;)
381 2017-12-30T11:46:39  <luke-jr> (and eventually the project can revert it when we're ready to get to a real 1.0)
382 2017-12-30T11:54:01  <zelest> o/
383 2017-12-30T11:54:10  <echeveria> at some point soon there'll be pretty good justification for dislodging the wallet from bitcoin core.
384 2017-12-30T11:54:28  <echeveria> it's almost unusable as a wallet now, and I'm pretty tolerant of bad user experiences.
385 2017-12-30T11:54:40  <sipa> how so?
386 2017-12-30T11:54:44  <wumpus> it's pretty usable as a wallet IMO
387 2017-12-30T11:55:30  <luke-jr> I find it very usable, but I'm admittedly not an ordinary user and don't use it like an ordinary user probably would want to
388 2017-12-30T11:55:34  <wumpus> and as said, a full node without a wallet is pretty useless, unless you have other, better wallet to interface with it, which doesn't exist at the moment
389 2017-12-30T11:56:10  <echeveria> it's by far the slowest, highest resource usage piece of software around. I can either suffer it destroying my battery life and bandwidth, or wait for it to catch up a week or two of blocks every time I want to use it.
390 2017-12-30T11:56:11  <wumpus> there are certainly wallets with better UI, but the privacy/flexibility of bitcoin core's wallet is one of the best
391 2017-12-30T11:56:21  <wumpus> that's because you're running a full node
392 2017-12-30T11:56:27  <wumpus> that has nothing to do with the wallet
393 2017-12-30T11:56:28  <luke-jr> wumpus: lots of other wallets exist
394 2017-12-30T11:56:32  <echeveria> note that I said dislodge, not remove.
395 2017-12-30T11:56:35  <wumpus> luke-jr: yes, but I don't think they're better
396 2017-12-30T11:56:35  <sipa> echeveria: those are inherent to running a full node
397 2017-12-30T11:56:42  <wumpus> luke-jr: apart from UI-niceness
398 2017-12-30T11:56:43  <luke-jr> I agree
399 2017-12-30T11:56:46  <sipa> echeveria: dislodging the wallet from the node won't change that
400 2017-12-30T11:56:53  <luke-jr> I also think B-Qt's UI is the nicest ;P
401 2017-12-30T11:57:28  <luke-jr> echeveria: that's what it means to use Bitcoin though
402 2017-12-30T11:57:54  <wumpus> echeveria: so how would the user experience *concretely* become better with a 'dislodged' wallet?
403 2017-12-30T11:58:22  <wumpus> echeveria: apart from the drawback of  having to install two programs to have a full node with wallet
404 2017-12-30T11:58:41  <wumpus> echeveria: I like modularization but that doesn't really solve the problem of anything being slow or such things
405 2017-12-30T11:59:00  <wumpus> echeveria: if you want to improve the UI, just improve the uI
406 2017-12-30T11:59:21  <wumpus> that can be done without compounding the issue and extending the scope to reorganizaing the whole project
407 2017-12-30T11:59:37  <wumpus> which will never happen in one go
408 2017-12-30T11:59:42  <echeveria> there's a lot of scope for being able to remotely connect to a trusted node, without giving it any key responsibility.
409 2017-12-30T12:00:05  <sipa> echeveria: fair point
410 2017-12-30T12:00:26  <wumpus> you could already do that though, by running a full node and connecting a SPV node to that
411 2017-12-30T12:00:27  <luke-jr> need BIPs 150 & 151 to do that reasonably safe
412 2017-12-30T12:00:35  <luke-jr> or Tor
413 2017-12-30T12:00:37  <wumpus> there are SPV wallets where you can specify a trusted node
414 2017-12-30T12:00:42  <echeveria> damn, was chewing as missed my 'inb4 bip37'.
415 2017-12-30T12:01:06  <wumpus> in any case, this has been discussed since 2012, patches welcome
416 2017-12-30T12:01:11  <echeveria> it takes like, 45 minutes to sync over bip37 now and it shreds the node you're connected to.
417 2017-12-30T12:01:20  <echeveria> wumpus: I'm not demanding anything of you, or anyone.
418 2017-12-30T12:01:24  <wumpus> more arguing doesn't change anything
419 2017-12-30T12:01:26  <wumpus> it never did
420 2017-12-30T12:02:05  <wumpus> no one is writing software for you for free, if you want something you need to commit to writing it, or having someone write it, or at least to reviewing the end product (there's a few PRs open that move in that direction)
421 2017-12-30T12:02:58  <echeveria> I never asked you to.
422 2017-12-30T12:03:25  <echeveria> I was busy making sure bip37 was disabled on my nodes, that's all.
423 2017-12-30T12:04:31  <sipa> in any casez i agree it would be a useful evolution to running a full node separately from the wallet
424 2017-12-30T12:04:51  <wumpus> yes, exposing bip37 to random nodes was probably not the best idea
425 2017-12-30T12:05:01  <wumpus> it's okay for your own whitelisted wallet
426 2017-12-30T12:05:03  <sipa> though avoiding the bandwidth issue of syncing isn't magically solved by that
427 2017-12-30T12:05:10  <sipa> neutrino is one possibility
428 2017-12-30T12:05:15  <wumpus> certainly not....
429 2017-12-30T12:05:38  <wumpus> it'd just split the load over two hosts, which could be useful in some cases for some people
430 2017-12-30T12:05:55  <wumpus> which was my point that 'dislodging' the wallet is not a panacea
431 2017-12-30T12:06:15  <sipa> right
432 2017-12-30T12:11:54  <wumpus> for completelness: joinmarket's wallet uses a different approach, it imports its addresses as watch-only addresses into bitcoind
433 2017-12-30T12:13:52  <wumpus> this avoids the bandwidth issue between the bitcoind and wallet by doing the scanning server-side
434 2017-12-30T12:14:11  *** nibor has quit IRC
435 2017-12-30T12:15:26  *** provoostenator has quit IRC
436 2017-12-30T12:15:26  <wumpus> after all, if the node is trusted, it doesn't matter that you're leaking your public addresses to it
437 2017-12-30T12:15:44  <wumpus> -public
438 2017-12-30T12:16:13  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
439 2017-12-30T12:16:46  *** provoostenator has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
440 2017-12-30T12:17:28  <wumpus> that approach also works with a pruning node, without risk that blocks that the client wallet needs have been deleted
441 2017-12-30T12:19:13  <wumpus> (which bip37-based, or even full block SPV approaches would suffer from)
442 2017-12-30T12:21:15  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
443 2017-12-30T12:21:25  <wumpus> SPV wallets of any kind only have to sync from their birthday, so I don't see why '45 minutes to sync over bip37' unless it's an old wallet that hasn't been synced for a long time
444 2017-12-30T12:21:58  <wumpus> there is certainly no such requirement for new wallets
445 2017-12-30T12:22:23  <echeveria> wumpus: some of them sync from zero, not the birthday.
446 2017-12-30T12:23:03  <wumpus> that's unnecessary
447 2017-12-30T12:23:30  <echeveria> of course.
448 2017-12-30T12:23:52  <wumpus> haven't seen that for a long time anyhow, most of the wallets in active use don't have that problem
449 2017-12-30T12:24:48  *** nibor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
450 2017-12-30T12:25:23  <wumpus> anyhow see #10794
451 2017-12-30T12:25:26  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10794 | Add simple light-client mode (RPC only) by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10794 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
452 2017-12-30T12:25:40  <wumpus> or #9483
453 2017-12-30T12:25:43  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9483 | Complete hybrid full block SPV mode by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #9483 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
454 2017-12-30T12:35:12  *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
455 2017-12-30T12:45:06  <xiedeacc> can someone provide some information describe segwit in detail and clear?
456 2017-12-30T12:45:20  <xiedeacc> website or book
457 2017-12-30T12:48:11  *** xiedeacc has quit IRC
458 2017-12-30T12:52:39  *** xiedeacc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
459 2017-12-30T12:53:12  <xiedeacc> sorry, computer crashed
460 2017-12-30T12:53:42  <sipa> xiedeacc: bip141, bip143, bip144
461 2017-12-30T12:53:55  <sipa> for questions, https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com
462 2017-12-30T12:54:46  <xiedeacc> thanks~
463 2017-12-30T12:55:53  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/efae3663a772...63a4dc10876b
464 2017-12-30T12:55:53  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5ec3eae Pablo Fernandez: remove brew c++ flag...
465 2017-12-30T12:55:54  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 63a4dc1 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12027: [Docs] Remove boost --c++ flag from osx build instructions...
466 2017-12-30T12:56:31  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12027: [Docs] Remove boost --c++ flag from osx build instructions (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12027
467 2017-12-30T12:59:50  *** xiedeacc has quit IRC
468 2017-12-30T13:09:26  <echeveria> uh
469 2017-12-30T13:09:32  <echeveria> 9bf8853b3a823bbfa1e54017ae11a9e1f4d08a854dcce9f24e08114f2c921182
470 2017-12-30T13:09:45  <echeveria> well someone just fucked up badly and mined a zero value block.
471 2017-12-30T13:11:10  <wumpus> nice, not even the block reward
472 2017-12-30T13:12:26  <sturles> Not seen by my node. :-/
473 2017-12-30T13:12:40  <echeveria> uh.
474 2017-12-30T13:12:46  <echeveria> so blockchain.info is stuck on it.
475 2017-12-30T13:13:00  <echeveria> the block hash is 0000000000000000004b27f9ee7ba33d6f048f684aaeb0eea4befd80f1701126.
476 2017-12-30T13:13:24  <sturles> Ah, yes.  I've got that one.
477 2017-12-30T13:13:56  <sturles> Mined by AntPool.
478 2017-12-30T13:14:07  <echeveria> why do you say that?
479 2017-12-30T13:14:22  <echeveria> there's nothing identifying in the coinbase nonce, and no output address.
480 2017-12-30T13:14:33  <sturles> According to https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin
481 2017-12-30T13:14:49  <sturles> Could be wrong.  I have no idea where they get the information.
482 2017-12-30T13:14:59  <sturles> Some pools publish the blocks they find.
483 2017-12-30T13:15:30  <sturles> Claims to have found.
484 2017-12-30T13:15:52  <echeveria> https://www.antpool.com/poolStats.htm < they're not claiming it
485 2017-12-30T13:18:47  <wumpus> the vout script is weird, invalid "RSKBLOCK:\xdd\xbfQz\xdf\x8f\xfdK\xcawQP[9\xc9\x01:\r\x1f\xd4y\xfcN\x90\x1b9\xddW\xb3G\xc6$"
486 2017-12-30T13:19:06  <sipa> rootstock?
487 2017-12-30T13:20:38  <echeveria> https://github.com/rsksmart/rskj/blob/e03421af1e361114f9e63838b92b008c518c0638/rskj-core/src/main/java/co/rsk/validators/ProofOfWorkRule.java#L94
488 2017-12-30T13:20:49  <wumpus> gah, would have been proper to put that in a OP_RETURN instead of just using an invalid script
489 2017-12-30T13:20:54  <echeveria> yeah, looks like a rootstock commitment. that was an expensive mistake.
490 2017-12-30T13:24:09  <echeveria> they vaporized about $240,000. who the hell writes custom software and doesn't check that they have the payout set to something sane?
491 2017-12-30T13:42:51  <provoostenator> Our own little DAO :-)
492 2017-12-30T13:43:21  <provoostenator> Wasn't the previous record of not claiming a coinbase reward 1 satoshi?
493 2017-12-30T13:44:01  <echeveria> provoostenator: no. https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0030.mediawiki
494 2017-12-30T13:45:56  <provoostenator> echeveria: do you mean someone didn't implement that BIP in time and lost funds?
495 2017-12-30T13:46:33  <echeveria> provoostenator: read the BIP, two duplicate block rewards (2x 50 BTC) don't exist.
496 2017-12-30T13:46:50  <provoostenator> I thought they were grandfathered in?
497 2017-12-30T13:47:19  <echeveria> they were clobbered. they have the same hash, so spending one spends "both".
498 2017-12-30T13:48:00  <provoostenator> Ok, I see, so those blocks are valid, but their coinbases were already worthless. So the BIP prevents miners from wasting money this way (among the other benefits explictly mentioned).
499 2017-12-30T13:49:02  <echeveria> BIP34 specifies a soft fork that makes them unique by adding a nonce to the coinbase.
500 2017-12-30T13:51:17  <sipa> https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/38998/208
501 2017-12-30T13:51:29  <sipa> ^ all known cases of known losses
502 2017-12-30T13:51:48  <echeveria> needs updating for the latest 12.5 BTC loss.
503 2017-12-30T13:52:22  <sipa> yeah.
504 2017-12-30T13:53:13  <provoostenator> Ah yes, wonderful how block explorers have to deal with that special case: https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/d5d27987d2a3dfc724e359870c6644b40e497bdc0589a033220fe15429d88599
505 2017-12-30T13:55:16  *** blackbaba has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
506 2017-12-30T13:57:27  <provoostenator> sipa while you're at it, maybe link to an explanation for "the coins created in the genesis block cannot be spent"?
507 2017-12-30T13:58:28  *** fanquake has quit IRC
508 2017-12-30T13:59:52  <sipa> provoostenator: they just can't
509 2017-12-30T14:00:56  <sipa> every version of the bitcoin full node software would have considered a spend of the genesis output as invalid; hence, it is invalid
510 2017-12-30T14:01:26  <sipa> it may have been intentional or an oversight, but that doesn't matter
511 2017-12-30T14:02:12  <Varunram> sipa: so, satoshi didn't add the genesis block coins to the tx db?
512 2017-12-30T14:02:39  <provoostenator> My understanding is that it was hardcoded into the client in some later version, though by that time it was too late, because even older versions would consider spending that a hardfork, so presumably new versions also don't allow it.
513 2017-12-30T14:03:21  <provoostenator> And about the least important thing you could possibly want to change.
514 2017-12-30T14:03:25  <Varunram> oh, ok
515 2017-12-30T14:04:07  <sipa> provoostenator: in early versions it was because the genesis block was never processed, so its output was never added to the txdb (precursor of the utxo set)
516 2017-12-30T14:04:27  <sipa> in recent versions it's an explicit special case
517 2017-12-30T14:04:53  <sipa> (introduced to prevent creating a hardfork w.r.t. older versions)
518 2017-12-30T14:04:54  <provoostenator> Do all altcoins based on this codebase have the same behavior?
519 2017-12-30T14:04:58  *** blackbaba has quit IRC
520 2017-12-30T14:05:07  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
521 2017-12-30T14:05:54  <sipa> provoostenator: no idea
522 2017-12-30T14:10:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
523 2017-12-30T14:13:20  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
524 2017-12-30T14:13:20  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
525 2017-12-30T14:13:25  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
526 2017-12-30T14:38:37  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
527 2017-12-30T14:38:56  *** dyboj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
528 2017-12-30T14:40:50  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
529 2017-12-30T14:42:42  *** dyboj has quit IRC
530 2017-12-30T15:14:45  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
531 2017-12-30T15:18:57  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
532 2017-12-30T15:18:59  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
533 2017-12-30T15:36:44  *** cplusboi has quit IRC
534 2017-12-30T15:42:22  *** ula has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
535 2017-12-30T15:56:27  *** Murch has quit IRC
536 2017-12-30T16:00:57  *** Kozuch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
537 2017-12-30T16:12:39  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
538 2017-12-30T16:16:35  *** finkan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
539 2017-12-30T16:35:53  *** finkan has quit IRC
540 2017-12-30T16:38:25  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
541 2017-12-30T16:38:44  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542 2017-12-30T16:41:19  *** imnothreat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
543 2017-12-30T16:42:50  *** finkan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
544 2017-12-30T16:49:53  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
545 2017-12-30T16:55:45  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
546 2017-12-30T17:00:25  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
547 2017-12-30T17:01:42  *** owowo has quit IRC
548 2017-12-30T17:02:08  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
549 2017-12-30T17:02:19  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
550 2017-12-30T17:02:58  *** HoloIRCUser4 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
551 2017-12-30T17:03:59  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
552 2017-12-30T17:04:43  *** finkan has quit IRC
553 2017-12-30T17:06:24  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
554 2017-12-30T17:11:01  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
555 2017-12-30T17:22:15  *** HoloIRCUser4 has quit IRC
556 2017-12-30T17:23:49  *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
557 2017-12-30T17:27:52  <achow101> provoostenator: no, some changed it to explicitly add the genesis block output to the txdb
558 2017-12-30T17:33:26  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
559 2017-12-30T17:33:55  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
560 2017-12-30T17:37:49  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
561 2017-12-30T17:38:12  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
562 2017-12-30T17:39:40  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
563 2017-12-30T17:46:50  *** lvmbdv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
564 2017-12-30T17:47:13  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
565 2017-12-30T17:49:06  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
566 2017-12-30T17:49:45  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
567 2017-12-30T17:51:25  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
568 2017-12-30T17:52:34  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
569 2017-12-30T17:55:08  <lvmbdv> hello, if P2PKH was the only mechanism of payment, would keeping witness data make more sense?
570 2017-12-30T17:55:38  <sipa> ?
571 2017-12-30T17:56:30  <Randolf> lvmbdv:  You'd probably find that the #bitcoin channel is a really great place to ask that question.
572 2017-12-30T17:56:47  <lvmbdv> sorry, i will
573 2017-12-30T17:57:24  <Randolf> :)
574 2017-12-30T17:57:38  <Sentineo> but it certainly needs rephrasing ;)
575 2017-12-30T17:59:57  <midnightmagic> sipa: sorry about that.  I can put in an exception if you like
576 2017-12-30T18:00:26  *** arubi has quit IRC
577 2017-12-30T18:01:02  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
578 2017-12-30T18:01:14  <sipa> midnightmagic: heh, no
579 2017-12-30T18:01:22  <sipa> i should just identify
580 2017-12-30T18:06:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
581 2017-12-30T18:07:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
582 2017-12-30T18:08:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
583 2017-12-30T18:09:03  *** rabidus has quit IRC
584 2017-12-30T18:09:16  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
585 2017-12-30T18:10:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
586 2017-12-30T18:11:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
587 2017-12-30T18:20:53  <midnightmagic> k
588 2017-12-30T18:28:28  *** sengehest has quit IRC
589 2017-12-30T18:28:55  *** sengehest has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
590 2017-12-30T18:31:42  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
591 2017-12-30T18:41:20  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
592 2017-12-30T18:41:49  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
593 2017-12-30T18:55:08  *** jb55 has quit IRC
594 2017-12-30T19:05:34  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
595 2017-12-30T19:05:54  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
596 2017-12-30T19:07:43  *** d0xffea has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
597 2017-12-30T19:13:35  *** mmmmmm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
598 2017-12-30T19:20:33  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
599 2017-12-30T19:20:50  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
600 2017-12-30T19:21:49  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
601 2017-12-30T19:22:24  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602 2017-12-30T19:24:56  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
603 2017-12-30T19:28:08  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
604 2017-12-30T19:32:01  *** twistedline has quit IRC
605 2017-12-30T19:32:09  *** twistedline_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
606 2017-12-30T19:35:02  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
607 2017-12-30T19:40:47  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
608 2017-12-30T19:43:32  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
609 2017-12-30T19:44:09  *** promag has quit IRC
610 2017-12-30T20:00:15  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
611 2017-12-30T20:08:39  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612 2017-12-30T20:10:09  *** andytoshi has quit IRC
613 2017-12-30T20:10:09  *** andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
614 2017-12-30T20:18:06  *** mmmmmm has quit IRC
615 2017-12-30T20:22:02  *** jb55 has quit IRC
616 2017-12-30T20:31:28  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
617 2017-12-30T20:31:58  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
618 2017-12-30T20:40:35  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
619 2017-12-30T20:43:52  *** imnothreat has quit IRC
620 2017-12-30T20:45:00  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
621 2017-12-30T20:49:58  *** mrfrasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622 2017-12-30T21:09:07  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
623 2017-12-30T21:12:35  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
624 2017-12-30T21:13:01  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
625 2017-12-30T21:16:28  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
626 2017-12-30T21:18:04  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
627 2017-12-30T21:18:58  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
628 2017-12-30T21:21:03  *** juscamar1 has quit IRC
629 2017-12-30T21:27:34  *** juscamar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
630 2017-12-30T21:42:27  *** Randolf has quit IRC
631 2017-12-30T21:44:33  *** harrymm has quit IRC
632 2017-12-30T21:46:50  *** ek33191 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
633 2017-12-30T21:52:27  *** ek33191 has quit IRC
634 2017-12-30T21:57:40  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
635 2017-12-30T21:58:32  *** promag has quit IRC
636 2017-12-30T21:59:09  *** SevenTimes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
637 2017-12-30T21:59:43  *** sdupre has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
638 2017-12-30T22:00:04  <sdupre> I having a C++ error making static builds.  Looking for some guidance.  Willing to pay.
639 2017-12-30T22:12:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
640 2017-12-30T22:12:11  *** d0xffea has quit IRC
641 2017-12-30T22:13:09  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642 2017-12-30T22:19:58  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
643 2017-12-30T22:21:48  *** gribble has quit IRC
644 2017-12-30T22:23:41  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
645 2017-12-30T22:27:47  *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
646 2017-12-30T22:28:26  *** sengehest has quit IRC
647 2017-12-30T22:55:42  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
648 2017-12-30T22:57:08  *** axlalkdkjfkjdefk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
649 2017-12-30T22:57:57  *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
650 2017-12-30T22:58:29  *** axlalkdkjfkjdefk has quit IRC
651 2017-12-30T23:00:12  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652 2017-12-30T23:05:04  *** ada_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
653 2017-12-30T23:05:22  *** ada_ is now known as Adarvc
654 2017-12-30T23:20:13  *** Cache_Money has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
655 2017-12-30T23:24:22  *** arubi has quit IRC
656 2017-12-30T23:27:24  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
657 2017-12-30T23:30:48  *** Tennis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
658 2017-12-30T23:32:15  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
659 2017-12-30T23:33:36  *** blaster has quit IRC
660 2017-12-30T23:42:21  *** Cache_Money has quit IRC
661 2017-12-30T23:42:38  *** chaus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662 2017-12-30T23:42:42  *** Murch has quit IRC
663 2017-12-30T23:42:45  *** Cache_Money has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
664 2017-12-30T23:43:25  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
665 2017-12-30T23:43:47  *** Murch has quit IRC
666 2017-12-30T23:47:35  *** jb55 has quit IRC
667 2017-12-30T23:52:31  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
668 2017-12-30T23:56:26  *** Cache_Money has quit IRC