12018-05-10T00:04:32 *** Tennis has quit IRC
22018-05-10T00:45:58 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
32018-05-10T00:48:52 *** belcher has quit IRC
42018-05-10T00:54:42 *** promag has quit IRC
52018-05-10T00:58:42 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62018-05-10T01:02:52 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
72018-05-10T01:05:53 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
82018-05-10T01:13:16 *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
92018-05-10T01:25:11 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102018-05-10T01:28:13 *** m8tion has quit IRC
112018-05-10T01:35:48 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
122018-05-10T01:48:47 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132018-05-10T01:57:33 *** cubancorona has quit IRC
142018-05-10T02:00:53 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152018-05-10T02:47:16 *** nullptr| has quit IRC
162018-05-10T02:48:20 <glaksmono> anyone is around?
172018-05-10T02:49:42 *** nullptr| has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182018-05-10T02:50:56 <sipa> glaksmono: sure
192018-05-10T02:52:34 *** isis_ is now known as isis
202018-05-10T02:55:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
212018-05-10T02:55:22 *** glaksmon_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222018-05-10T02:56:08 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232018-05-10T02:58:13 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
242018-05-10T03:03:57 *** glaksmon_ has quit IRC
252018-05-10T03:09:02 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
262018-05-10T03:09:23 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272018-05-10T03:11:18 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
282018-05-10T03:11:35 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292018-05-10T03:13:30 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
302018-05-10T03:13:47 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312018-05-10T03:36:42 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
322018-05-10T03:36:59 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332018-05-10T03:43:53 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
342018-05-10T03:45:00 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352018-05-10T03:55:58 *** gwillen has quit IRC
362018-05-10T03:56:35 *** gwillen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372018-05-10T04:15:14 *** Krellan has quit IRC
382018-05-10T04:15:59 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392018-05-10T04:17:07 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
402018-05-10T04:17:34 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412018-05-10T04:21:44 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
422018-05-10T04:22:08 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
432018-05-10T04:23:16 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
442018-05-10T04:25:20 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452018-05-10T04:26:20 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
462018-05-10T04:26:42 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472018-05-10T04:28:36 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
482018-05-10T04:28:57 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
492018-05-10T04:29:54 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
502018-05-10T04:29:57 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] leiyong1413 opened pull request #13206: Zerotoone (master...zerotoone) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13206
512018-05-10T04:30:42 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #13206: Zerotoone (master...zerotoone) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13206
522018-05-10T04:31:51 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
532018-05-10T04:33:36 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542018-05-10T04:35:31 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
552018-05-10T04:36:41 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562018-05-10T04:37:08 *** cryptojanitor has quit IRC
572018-05-10T04:38:08 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
582018-05-10T04:38:25 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592018-05-10T04:40:19 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
602018-05-10T04:41:29 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612018-05-10T04:58:29 *** ghost43 has quit IRC
622018-05-10T04:58:43 *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
632018-05-10T04:59:57 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642018-05-10T05:04:05 *** sipa has quit IRC
652018-05-10T05:05:10 *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662018-05-10T05:20:17 *** shnarf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672018-05-10T05:21:52 *** shnarf is now known as wolfie
682018-05-10T05:22:21 *** wolfie is now known as Guest63669
692018-05-10T05:27:11 *** Guest63669 has quit IRC
702018-05-10T05:45:31 *** Yieazy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712018-05-10T05:46:32 *** Yieazy has quit IRC
722018-05-10T05:47:08 *** sipa has quit IRC
732018-05-10T05:54:32 *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
742018-05-10T05:55:50 *** jcorgan has quit IRC
752018-05-10T05:56:40 *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
762018-05-10T05:58:04 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
772018-05-10T05:58:04 *** Magma has quit IRC
782018-05-10T05:59:27 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
792018-05-10T05:59:45 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
802018-05-10T06:10:33 *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
812018-05-10T06:22:19 <kallewoof> promag: Do you agree with the conclusions Nicolas and I made in #12634 regarding 0/1?
822018-05-10T06:22:19 *** Krellan has quit IRC
832018-05-10T06:22:21 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12634 | [refactor] Make TransactionWithinChainLimit more flexible by kallewoof · Pull Request #12634 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
842018-05-10T06:23:24 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
852018-05-10T06:23:32 *** tripleslash has quit IRC
862018-05-10T06:24:09 *** Guest63669 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
872018-05-10T06:26:41 *** dafuq_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
882018-05-10T06:27:25 *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
892018-05-10T06:30:03 *** murrayn has quit IRC
902018-05-10T06:31:40 *** sipa has quit IRC
912018-05-10T06:39:31 *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
922018-05-10T06:42:04 *** jamesob has quit IRC
932018-05-10T06:42:04 *** jnewbery has quit IRC
942018-05-10T06:42:34 *** zxzzt has quit IRC
952018-05-10T06:43:38 *** jnewbery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962018-05-10T06:43:51 *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
972018-05-10T06:44:07 *** zxzzt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
982018-05-10T06:53:01 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
992018-05-10T06:53:09 *** jcorgan has quit IRC
1002018-05-10T06:54:16 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012018-05-10T06:54:44 *** ghost43 has quit IRC
1022018-05-10T06:55:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1032018-05-10T06:55:03 *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042018-05-10T06:55:31 *** sanada has quit IRC
1052018-05-10T06:55:44 *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062018-05-10T06:56:16 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1072018-05-10T06:57:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1082018-05-10T06:58:07 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1092018-05-10T06:58:53 <jonasschnelli> What exactly does the undocumented -forcecompactdb do?
1102018-05-10T06:59:01 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1112018-05-10T06:59:41 <jonasschnelli> or say, what is the effect of leveldb's pdb->CompactRange(&slKey1, &slKey2);?
1122018-05-10T07:00:16 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132018-05-10T07:00:17 *** promag has quit IRC
1142018-05-10T07:00:30 *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152018-05-10T07:07:33 *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162018-05-10T07:08:44 <fanquake> jonasschnelli #10526
1172018-05-10T07:08:47 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10526 | Force on-the-fly compaction during pertxout upgrade by sipa · Pull Request #10526 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1182018-05-10T07:09:50 <fanquake> & #10985
1192018-05-10T07:09:51 <kallewoof> jonasschnelli: The docs seem to indicate it clears up some space: https://godoc.org/github.com/syndtr/goleveldb/leveldb#DB.CompactRange
1202018-05-10T07:09:52 <jonasschnelli> fanquake: Thanks for the research!
1212018-05-10T07:09:52 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10985 | Add undocumented -forcecompactdb to force LevelDB compactions by sipa · Pull Request #10985 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1222018-05-10T07:10:04 <jonasschnelli> kallewoof: indeed. Thanks
1232018-05-10T07:20:45 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242018-05-10T07:28:13 *** Guest63669 is now known as shnarf
1252018-05-10T07:29:40 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
1262018-05-10T07:30:00 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1272018-05-10T07:31:55 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
1282018-05-10T07:32:14 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292018-05-10T08:01:25 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1302018-05-10T08:02:02 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1312018-05-10T08:06:18 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1322018-05-10T08:07:54 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332018-05-10T08:14:40 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
1342018-05-10T08:22:13 *** booyah has quit IRC
1352018-05-10T08:23:10 *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1362018-05-10T08:24:46 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372018-05-10T08:27:59 <jonasschnelli> When I execute "generate 10" on a regtest node, it will only inv the most recent block to the connected peer
1382018-05-10T08:27:59 <jonasschnelli> https://pastebin.com/raw/m7b39bRX
1392018-05-10T08:28:05 <jonasschnelli> Is this also expected on mainnet?
1402018-05-10T08:28:13 <jonasschnelli> Why only the last block? Concurrency issue?
1412018-05-10T08:28:40 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1422018-05-10T08:29:03 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432018-05-10T08:29:04 *** Magma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442018-05-10T08:32:12 *** harrymm has quit IRC
1452018-05-10T08:33:16 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
1462018-05-10T08:36:14 *** ajtowns[m] has quit IRC
1472018-05-10T08:36:15 *** herzmeister[m] has quit IRC
1482018-05-10T08:36:18 *** stepa[m] has quit IRC
1492018-05-10T08:36:35 *** kewde[m] has quit IRC
1502018-05-10T08:37:41 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512018-05-10T08:39:41 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
1522018-05-10T08:40:34 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1532018-05-10T08:41:40 *** joshb[m] has quit IRC
1542018-05-10T08:41:40 *** squarfed[m] has quit IRC
1552018-05-10T08:41:46 <promag> kallewoof: I'll take a look and I'll get back to you later ok?
1562018-05-10T08:44:38 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1572018-05-10T08:47:40 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
1582018-05-10T08:47:40 *** Magma has quit IRC
1592018-05-10T08:48:34 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602018-05-10T08:49:56 *** timothy has quit IRC
1612018-05-10T08:52:08 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1622018-05-10T08:53:20 <kallewoof> promag: No rush!
1632018-05-10T08:56:51 *** timothy has quit IRC
1642018-05-10T08:56:56 *** drizztbsd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1652018-05-10T09:04:02 *** vicenteH has quit IRC
1662018-05-10T09:06:13 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1672018-05-10T09:06:13 *** Magma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1682018-05-10T09:06:21 *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1692018-05-10T09:06:55 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702018-05-10T09:11:28 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
1712018-05-10T09:17:03 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722018-05-10T09:27:09 *** cryptapus has quit IRC
1732018-05-10T09:27:32 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742018-05-10T09:27:32 *** cryptapus has quit IRC
1752018-05-10T09:27:32 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1762018-05-10T09:30:55 *** joshb[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1772018-05-10T09:32:10 *** cryptojanitor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1782018-05-10T09:35:14 *** ExtraCrispy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1792018-05-10T09:35:29 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
1802018-05-10T09:43:01 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812018-05-10T09:44:11 *** rabidus has quit IRC
1822018-05-10T09:45:56 *** rabidus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1832018-05-10T09:48:56 *** windsok has quit IRC
1842018-05-10T09:55:47 *** BiJa2ka2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1852018-05-10T10:11:17 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1862018-05-10T10:12:45 *** stepa[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872018-05-10T10:12:45 *** squarfed[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1882018-05-10T10:12:45 *** herzmeister[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1892018-05-10T10:12:45 *** ajtowns[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1902018-05-10T10:12:46 *** kewde[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912018-05-10T10:21:07 *** promag has quit IRC
1922018-05-10T10:26:47 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932018-05-10T10:29:30 *** promag has quit IRC
1942018-05-10T10:35:57 *** Krellan has quit IRC
1952018-05-10T10:36:25 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1962018-05-10T11:00:09 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1972018-05-10T11:01:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1982018-05-10T11:02:17 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1992018-05-10T11:10:51 *** meshcollider has quit IRC
2002018-05-10T11:11:12 *** BiJa2ka2 has quit IRC
2012018-05-10T11:16:57 *** jtimon has quit IRC
2022018-05-10T11:20:45 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2032018-05-10T11:23:00 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof opened pull request #13208: wallet rpc: constraints in send* methods (master...feature-sendtoaddress-constraints) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13208
2042018-05-10T11:24:51 *** rabidus has quit IRC
2052018-05-10T11:31:35 <fanquake> kallewoof looks like Travis is failing early on the CHECK DOC
2062018-05-10T11:56:53 *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2072018-05-10T12:03:10 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2082018-05-10T12:12:49 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2092018-05-10T12:18:01 *** promag has quit IRC
2102018-05-10T12:22:40 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2112018-05-10T12:26:57 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
2122018-05-10T12:27:43 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] glaksmono opened pull request #13209: [WIP] Refactoring platform-specific code in util.h/util.cpp (master...bitcoin-12697) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13209
2132018-05-10T12:36:10 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
2142018-05-10T12:36:42 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2152018-05-10T12:38:52 *** spinza has quit IRC
2162018-05-10T12:40:51 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
2172018-05-10T12:48:16 *** tryphe has quit IRC
2182018-05-10T12:48:43 *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2192018-05-10T12:51:00 *** tryphe has quit IRC
2202018-05-10T12:51:23 *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2212018-05-10T12:55:08 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2222018-05-10T12:55:12 *** tryphe has quit IRC
2232018-05-10T12:58:07 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242018-05-10T13:11:44 *** owowo has quit IRC
2252018-05-10T13:15:29 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262018-05-10T13:19:02 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272018-05-10T13:19:49 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
2282018-05-10T13:20:58 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292018-05-10T13:23:15 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2302018-05-10T13:27:21 *** rex4539 has quit IRC
2312018-05-10T13:31:08 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2322018-05-10T13:32:16 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332018-05-10T13:34:02 *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
2342018-05-10T13:38:57 *** fanquake has quit IRC
2352018-05-10T13:50:08 *** shnarf has quit IRC
2362018-05-10T13:53:55 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2372018-05-10T13:56:25 *** cyumacedro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2382018-05-10T14:03:58 *** cyumacedro has quit IRC
2392018-05-10T14:05:39 *** farmerwampum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2402018-05-10T14:10:08 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2412018-05-10T14:10:48 *** farmerwampum has quit IRC
2422018-05-10T14:11:16 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432018-05-10T14:12:34 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2442018-05-10T14:14:40 *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452018-05-10T14:15:08 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2462018-05-10T14:15:19 *** intcat has quit IRC
2472018-05-10T14:15:47 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482018-05-10T14:18:56 *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2492018-05-10T14:20:41 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2502018-05-10T14:20:58 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512018-05-10T14:23:03 *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522018-05-10T14:23:13 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2532018-05-10T14:25:09 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2542018-05-10T14:25:26 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552018-05-10T14:27:13 *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562018-05-10T14:27:18 *** anome has quit IRC
2572018-05-10T14:27:48 *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2582018-05-10T14:29:25 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2592018-05-10T14:29:44 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602018-05-10T14:33:50 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/196c5a947a07...f3e747ee775f
2612018-05-10T14:33:50 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 09c6699 Suhas Daftuar: [qa] Handle disconnect_node race...
2622018-05-10T14:33:51 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f3e747e MarcoFalke: Merge #13201: [qa] Handle disconnect_node race...
2632018-05-10T14:34:48 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13201: [qa] Handle disconnect_node race (master...2018-05-rpc-disconnect-race) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13201
2642018-05-10T14:39:23 *** dx25 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652018-05-10T14:44:34 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
2662018-05-10T14:45:45 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2672018-05-10T14:46:31 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2682018-05-10T14:50:18 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2692018-05-10T14:50:55 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702018-05-10T14:51:47 <promag> achow101: hi, you have a bunch of nits in #13112: `try {` instead of `try\n` and missing space in `fprintf(stderr,"Error...`
2712018-05-10T14:51:50 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13112 | Throw an error for unknown args by achow101 · Pull Request #13112 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2722018-05-10T14:54:03 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
2732018-05-10T14:55:05 <Lauda> Is gettxoutsetinfo supposed to take a long time to process?
2742018-05-10T14:55:17 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2752018-05-10T14:55:39 *** jcorgan has quit IRC
2762018-05-10T14:55:39 *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2772018-05-10T15:00:54 *** arubi has quit IRC
2782018-05-10T15:01:10 *** promag has quit IRC
2792018-05-10T15:01:21 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802018-05-10T15:01:57 *** m8tion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2812018-05-10T15:03:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
2822018-05-10T15:04:02 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2832018-05-10T15:04:17 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2842018-05-10T15:04:50 *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2852018-05-10T15:05:24 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2862018-05-10T15:06:43 <wumpus> Lauda: yes
2872018-05-10T15:06:54 <wumpus> Lauda: should be in the help message
2882018-05-10T15:07:13 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
2892018-05-10T15:07:16 <Lauda> Thanks!
2902018-05-10T15:07:37 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f3e747ee775f...1c582503507b
2912018-05-10T15:07:37 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 12d1b77 lmanners: [tests] Fixed intermittent failure in p2p_sendheaders.py....
2922018-05-10T15:07:38 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1c58250 MarcoFalke: Merge #13192: [tests] Fixed intermittent failure in p2p_sendheaders.py....
2932018-05-10T15:08:27 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13192: [tests] Fixed intermittent failure in p2p_sendheaders.py. (master...p2p_sendheaders) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13192
2942018-05-10T15:16:19 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2952018-05-10T15:16:35 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962018-05-10T15:18:30 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2972018-05-10T15:18:47 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2982018-05-10T15:20:43 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
2992018-05-10T15:21:59 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3002018-05-10T15:23:00 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3012018-05-10T15:23:49 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022018-05-10T15:24:55 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
3032018-05-10T15:26:24 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3042018-05-10T15:31:43 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3052018-05-10T15:32:00 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3062018-05-10T15:32:05 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jbampton opened pull request #13210: Trivial: Remove trailing whitespace from Python files (master...remove-whitespace) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13210
3072018-05-10T15:33:54 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3082018-05-10T15:34:26 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3092018-05-10T15:38:21 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3102018-05-10T15:38:43 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3112018-05-10T15:41:57 *** Comerz2010 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3122018-05-10T15:44:39 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3132018-05-10T15:46:12 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3142018-05-10T15:48:08 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3152018-05-10T15:48:25 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3162018-05-10T15:49:34 *** Randolf has quit IRC
3172018-05-10T15:50:34 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3182018-05-10T15:51:08 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3192018-05-10T15:53:44 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
3202018-05-10T15:55:02 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3212018-05-10T15:55:29 *** rex4539 has quit IRC
3222018-05-10T16:02:57 *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3232018-05-10T16:03:39 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
3242018-05-10T16:05:02 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3252018-05-10T16:07:07 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3262018-05-10T16:09:02 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3272018-05-10T16:09:22 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3282018-05-10T16:11:29 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3292018-05-10T16:12:36 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3302018-05-10T16:13:36 *** rex4539 has quit IRC
3312018-05-10T16:15:26 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3322018-05-10T16:16:34 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3332018-05-10T16:16:52 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3342018-05-10T16:21:05 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
3352018-05-10T16:26:47 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3362018-05-10T16:27:10 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3372018-05-10T16:28:27 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3382018-05-10T16:31:05 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3392018-05-10T16:31:37 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3402018-05-10T16:33:26 *** booyah has quit IRC
3412018-05-10T16:34:26 *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3422018-05-10T16:36:35 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3432018-05-10T16:36:52 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3442018-05-10T16:37:59 *** zivl has quit IRC
3452018-05-10T16:39:28 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
3462018-05-10T16:41:35 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
3472018-05-10T16:42:05 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3482018-05-10T16:42:55 *** anome has quit IRC
3492018-05-10T16:45:41 *** jtimon has quit IRC
3502018-05-10T16:46:08 *** zivl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3512018-05-10T16:56:05 *** ExtraCrispy has quit IRC
3522018-05-10T16:58:03 *** Krellan has quit IRC
3532018-05-10T16:59:15 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3542018-05-10T17:00:44 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3552018-05-10T17:01:16 *** Krellan has quit IRC
3562018-05-10T17:01:50 *** cryptojanitor has quit IRC
3572018-05-10T17:04:11 *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3582018-05-10T17:04:57 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
3592018-05-10T17:15:55 *** mistergold has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3602018-05-10T17:17:31 *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3612018-05-10T17:17:40 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3622018-05-10T17:25:06 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
3632018-05-10T17:25:17 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3642018-05-10T17:27:26 *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3652018-05-10T17:28:39 *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
3662018-05-10T17:29:01 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #13211: Use a semaphore or pipe for shutdown notification (master...2018_05_shutdown_notification) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13211
3672018-05-10T17:29:13 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #13186: Use a semaphore to trigger shutdown procedures (master...shutdown-cv) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13186
3682018-05-10T17:29:36 *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3692018-05-10T17:31:54 *** ibrightly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3702018-05-10T17:41:17 *** promag has quit IRC
3712018-05-10T17:41:21 *** vicenteH has quit IRC
3722018-05-10T17:49:49 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3732018-05-10T17:50:28 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] lmanners opened pull request #13212: Net: Fixed a race condition when disabling the network. (master...setnetworkactive) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13212
3742018-05-10T17:51:29 *** Bommelmuetze has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3752018-05-10T17:54:04 *** Randolf has quit IRC
3762018-05-10T17:54:16 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
3772018-05-10T17:56:15 *** Bommelmuetze has quit IRC
3782018-05-10T18:06:07 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
3792018-05-10T18:07:25 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3802018-05-10T18:07:59 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3812018-05-10T18:12:05 *** Krellan has quit IRC
3822018-05-10T18:16:41 *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3832018-05-10T18:17:08 *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3842018-05-10T18:17:57 *** drizztbsd has quit IRC
3852018-05-10T18:19:44 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3862018-05-10T18:19:54 *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
3872018-05-10T18:25:42 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3882018-05-10T18:27:40 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3892018-05-10T18:28:41 *** isis is now known as isis_
3902018-05-10T18:30:22 *** Krellan has quit IRC
3912018-05-10T18:30:23 *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3922018-05-10T18:31:59 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
3932018-05-10T18:35:11 *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
3942018-05-10T18:36:39 *** mistergold has quit IRC
3952018-05-10T18:40:58 *** dick_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3962018-05-10T18:41:15 *** dick_ has quit IRC
3972018-05-10T18:41:53 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3982018-05-10T18:43:52 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3992018-05-10T18:46:27 *** Krellan has quit IRC
4002018-05-10T18:51:53 *** Odin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4012018-05-10T18:54:29 <Odin> anybody has a cfw for antminer s5 or s7?
4022018-05-10T18:56:20 <wumpus> no (but this is probably not the right channel to ask)
4032018-05-10T18:56:37 <MarcoFalke> Meeting in 3 min?
4042018-05-10T18:57:48 <wumpus> yes
4052018-05-10T18:57:56 <MarcoFalke> Proposed topic: Cache witness hash in CTransaction #13011
4062018-05-10T18:57:58 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13011 | Cache witness hash in CTransaction by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13011 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4072018-05-10T18:59:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
4082018-05-10T18:59:08 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4092018-05-10T18:59:37 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4102018-05-10T19:00:07 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4112018-05-10T19:00:27 <wumpus> #startmeeting
4122018-05-10T19:00:27 <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu May 10 19:00:27 2018 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
4132018-05-10T19:00:27 <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
4142018-05-10T19:00:35 <promag> hi
4152018-05-10T19:00:39 <jonasschnelli> hi
4162018-05-10T19:00:42 <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator
4172018-05-10T19:00:50 <provoostenator> Hi
4182018-05-10T19:00:51 <cfields> hi
4192018-05-10T19:00:59 <wumpus> proposed topics?
4202018-05-10T19:01:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
4212018-05-10T19:01:05 <sipa> ohai
4222018-05-10T19:01:11 <jimpo> hi
4232018-05-10T19:01:15 <jcorgan> hey folks
4242018-05-10T19:01:36 <wumpus> hello
4252018-05-10T19:01:38 <jimpo> topic proposal: review coordination
4262018-05-10T19:02:16 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4272018-05-10T19:02:19 <wumpus> ok thanks,let's start with the usual
4282018-05-10T19:02:20 <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
4292018-05-10T19:02:28 <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
4302018-05-10T19:03:00 <achow101> hi
4312018-05-10T19:03:03 <wumpus> #10740 #13097 #12979 #12560 #10757
4322018-05-10T19:03:09 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10740 | [wallet] `loadwallet` RPC - load wallet at runtime by jnewbery · Pull Request #10740 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4332018-05-10T19:03:11 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13097 | ui: Support wallets loaded dynamically by promag · Pull Request #13097 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4342018-05-10T19:03:14 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12979 | Split validationinterface into parallel validation/mempool interfaces by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #12979 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4352018-05-10T19:03:19 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10757 | RPC: Introduce getblockstats to plot things by jtimon · Pull Request #10757 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4362018-05-10T19:03:24 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12560 | [wallet] Upgrade path for non-HD wallets to HD by achow101 · Pull Request #12560 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4372018-05-10T19:03:45 <jamesob> hi
4382018-05-10T19:03:51 <morcos> i'm back
4392018-05-10T19:03:56 <wumpus> welcome back!
4402018-05-10T19:04:00 <sipa> hi back, i'm pieter
4412018-05-10T19:04:09 <morcos> oh man...
4422018-05-10T19:04:12 <luke-jr> XD
4432018-05-10T19:04:19 <BlueMatt> mr back?
4442018-05-10T19:04:56 <wumpus> 10740 should be pretty close to mergeable (but getting unicorns right now)
4452018-05-10T19:05:18 <jimpo> Can I request #12254 for hi pri?
4462018-05-10T19:05:22 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12254 | BIP 158: Compact Block Filters for Light Clients by jimpo · Pull Request #12254 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4472018-05-10T19:05:54 <BlueMatt> god if this unicorns thing persists we're gonna have to move off github
4482018-05-10T19:06:17 <BlueMatt> (actually)
4492018-05-10T19:06:33 <wumpus> jimpo: ye
4502018-05-10T19:06:52 <jimpo> The GitHub load timeouts seem to be location specific maybe -- have you tried loading over VPN from different places?
4512018-05-10T19:06:58 <jimpo> Like VPN near GitHub servers?
4522018-05-10T19:07:04 <promag> yeah imo 10740 is good to go
4532018-05-10T19:07:19 <BlueMatt> mostly it works if you refresh enough or are logged out, but neither of those is a solution when the refresh count is about 10
4542018-05-10T19:07:24 <wumpus> no, I haven't tried using a vpn, when I tried tor it didn't help though
4552018-05-10T19:07:34 <BlueMatt> but we cant use a platform where half the contributors cant load prs
4562018-05-10T19:07:43 <jimpo> I left some late comments on 10740 yesterday. Biggest one is around the memory leak fix.
4572018-05-10T19:08:02 <wumpus> usually refreshing helps but sometimes it doesn't for very large PRs with lots of comments
4582018-05-10T19:08:13 <wumpus> agree github is pretty much useless this way
4592018-05-10T19:08:25 <promag> jimpo: +1, beside existing comments
4602018-05-10T19:08:31 <jamesob> everyone knows the emulate-mobile/incognito workaround, right?
4612018-05-10T19:09:34 <jamesob> (if you don't: use chrome developer tools to emulate a mobile device and problematic PRs should load)
4622018-05-10T19:10:00 <wumpus> jamesob: thanks
4632018-05-10T19:10:51 <wumpus> #topic Cache witness hash in CTransaction #13011 (MarcoFalke)
4642018-05-10T19:10:53 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13011 | Cache witness hash in CTransaction by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13011 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4652018-05-10T19:11:01 <MarcoFalke> Background: The witness hash is used for all loose transactions, so caching it would speed up validation (e.g. ATMP and compact block relay). Also, the witness hash is equal to the "normal hash" for transactions without a witness, so there is overhead for rescan/reindex is currently minimal (since there are not many transactions with witness). The gains of caching the witness hash dwarf any overhead during rescan/reindex, imo. And of course, we
4662018-05-10T19:11:02 <MarcoFalke> can just rework rescan in a future pr.
4672018-05-10T19:11:39 <MarcoFalke> The code changes are trivial, so at least that shouldn't be an issue
4682018-05-10T19:12:10 <jamesob> would be nice if that paragraph was in the PR description
4692018-05-10T19:12:30 <sipa> Downside is that it makes the transactions larger, and hardcodes some validation sprcific logic into the transaction data structure (which for example also affects serving blocks from disks etc)
4702018-05-10T19:12:53 <BlueMatt> upside is we rectify a significant performance regression
4712018-05-10T19:12:55 <sipa> So my view is that we should separate the transactions-for-validation tyoe and simple mutable transactions
4722018-05-10T19:13:08 <BlueMatt> and obviously all pre-segwit-activation blocks will not be served any slower
4732018-05-10T19:13:10 <MarcoFalke> sipa: I think those can easily be fixed in future prs (I have one open for the blocks serving from disks, and wumpus as well)
4742018-05-10T19:13:12 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4752018-05-10T19:13:26 <sipa> MarcoFalke: i'm aware, not objecting to amything
4762018-05-10T19:13:28 <BlueMatt> personally, I find it really unacceptable that we have this huge performance regression and arent taking it as something to be fixed asap
4772018-05-10T19:13:40 <MarcoFalke> sipa: I know, just posting for reference
4782018-05-10T19:13:41 <sipa> just pointing out that we don't want to do this work everywhere
4792018-05-10T19:13:52 *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4802018-05-10T19:13:55 <sipa> so concept ack, if we commit to separating those types
4812018-05-10T19:14:08 <wumpus> agree with sipa
4822018-05-10T19:14:13 <BlueMatt> yes, imo we should merge the per as-is now, and then when we look towards MarcoFalke's next pr splitting out the types (which is gonna be a lot more work) we will probably pull out both hashes then anyway
4832018-05-10T19:14:23 <sipa> there are other reasons for separating those types as well, btw
4842018-05-10T19:14:30 * BlueMatt would kinda recommending backporting the pr as-is, though
4852018-05-10T19:14:35 <MarcoFalke> For reference, the "separating those types" is hidden in #13098
4862018-05-10T19:14:36 <wumpus> let's not make the code a mess to rush ahead
4872018-05-10T19:14:38 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13098 | Skip tx-rehashing on historic blocks by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13098 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4882018-05-10T19:14:40 <BlueMatt> yes, I mean just fixing the txid hashing would be hugely nice
4892018-05-10T19:14:41 <sipa> such as using more efficient memory representation of scripts without individial mallocs etc
4902018-05-10T19:14:52 <kanzure> hi.
4912018-05-10T19:15:27 <wumpus> yes
4922018-05-10T19:15:37 <cfields> topic suggestion: ^^ one big malloc
4932018-05-10T19:15:43 <cfields> (when this one's done)
4942018-05-10T19:15:54 <BlueMatt> wumpus: if anything it makes the code simpler cause the witness and non-witness code is mirrored
4952018-05-10T19:16:10 <MarcoFalke> Should I put #13011 in hi priority and for backport?
4962018-05-10T19:16:12 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13011 | Cache witness hash in CTransaction by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13011 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4972018-05-10T19:16:20 <wumpus> BlueMatt: I just don't like confounding all kinds of aspects on the CTransaction object through, it's used in too many places
4982018-05-10T19:16:36 <BlueMatt> good thing miners dont pay much attention, or they wouldnt be mining segwit txn
4992018-05-10T19:17:22 <BlueMatt> wumpus: agreed, but point being the txid and wtxid code being symmetric isnt that much of a "mess"
5002018-05-10T19:17:32 <wumpus> BlueMatt: right...
5012018-05-10T19:17:37 <BlueMatt> and obviously agree we should be looking into rescan with a non-txid/non-wtxid type
5022018-05-10T19:17:44 <sipa> fait
5032018-05-10T19:17:47 <sipa> fair
5042018-05-10T19:17:51 <BlueMatt> but I have a feeling that is gonna be a lot of work
5052018-05-10T19:17:59 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
5062018-05-10T19:18:00 <BlueMatt> or at least take a while review-wise
5072018-05-10T19:19:09 <wumpus> MarcoFalke: ok added to high priority
5082018-05-10T19:19:15 <MarcoFalke> wumpus: thx
5092018-05-10T19:19:27 <MarcoFalke> I will update the OP, as requested by jamesob
5102018-05-10T19:19:34 <wumpus> not sure about the backport, I think it makes sense to focus on master for performance optimizations
5112018-05-10T19:19:59 <MarcoFalke> I don't care about the backport, but BlueMatt was asking for it
5122018-05-10T19:20:12 <BlueMatt> it slows down compact block relay, too, which is mostly why it sucks
5132018-05-10T19:20:13 <wumpus> unless it's really easy and low risk to backport it
5142018-05-10T19:20:18 <BlueMatt> otherwise I might care less
5152018-05-10T19:20:24 <cfields> agree with wumpus. I'm sure the changes are straightforward, but that's still risky for backport
5162018-05-10T19:20:25 <BlueMatt> the code diff is ~trivial
5172018-05-10T19:20:37 <morcos> i'm against the backport, but i'm often against backports. i think they don't get enough review, so they need to be really justified to do them
5182018-05-10T19:20:48 <wumpus> but normally I'd prefer not to backport things that are not bugfixes, or required to support bugfixes
5192018-05-10T19:21:11 <MarcoFalke> So let's leave it for now only in master, seems to be the conclusion
5202018-05-10T19:21:12 <BlueMatt> I do like having more reason for miners to upgrade to 0.16.1
5212018-05-10T19:21:33 <wumpus> MarcoFalke: yes
5222018-05-10T19:22:12 <MarcoFalke> Alright, other topics?
5232018-05-10T19:22:33 <BlueMatt> cfields: had one
5242018-05-10T19:23:03 <wumpus> #topic one big malloc (cfields)
5252018-05-10T19:23:24 <sipa> i like working on that, after #13062
5262018-05-10T19:23:24 <cfields> sipa and I have discussed this briefly, I thought it might be helpful to have a quick discussion here
5272018-05-10T19:23:27 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13062 | Make script interpreter independent from storage type CScript by sipa · Pull Request #13062 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5282018-05-10T19:23:31 <cfields> because there are a few different approaches
5292018-05-10T19:23:39 <BlueMatt> yea, I think thats the One Big motivation for 13062
5302018-05-10T19:24:01 <wumpus> one big alloc for the entire process?
5312018-05-10T19:24:02 *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
5322018-05-10T19:24:02 <cfields> sipa: is your plan to move to Spans inside of CTransaction?
5332018-05-10T19:24:18 <cfields> with a pool for the script data tacked onto the block somewhere?
5342018-05-10T19:24:38 <sipa> maybe, there are a lot of possibilities
5352018-05-10T19:24:39 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5362018-05-10T19:24:46 <BlueMatt> without it 13062 makes less sense than just haveing a ScriptSig and ScriptPubKey types
5372018-05-10T19:24:47 <cfields> wumpus: one malloc for script data per-block
5382018-05-10T19:24:48 <cfields> or so
5392018-05-10T19:24:49 <sipa> but 13062 is a prerequisite
5402018-05-10T19:24:57 <wumpus> 2cf
5412018-05-10T19:25:03 <wumpus> cfields: ok!
5422018-05-10T19:25:06 <sipa> (and more; there are a lot.of things that at CScript specific that shouldn't)
5432018-05-10T19:25:22 <cfields> well another option is std::allocator magic, without having to switch to Span
5442018-05-10T19:25:30 <wumpus> yes happy to see "span" hapening
5452018-05-10T19:25:34 <wumpus> noooo
5462018-05-10T19:25:43 <BlueMatt> heh, that would be a lot less code for similar results........
5472018-05-10T19:25:47 <wumpus> no magic
5482018-05-10T19:26:08 *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5492018-05-10T19:26:12 <BlueMatt> I mean you're gonna have similar levels of magic (with more layer violations) to deserialize a whole block into one pool
5502018-05-10T19:26:14 <wumpus> yes, but much less easy to understand code
5512018-05-10T19:26:46 <cfields> wumpus: i can't argue with that, it looks like voodoo
5522018-05-10T19:27:02 <sipa> damn cool voodoo.
5532018-05-10T19:27:05 <sipa> but voodoo.
5542018-05-10T19:27:05 <wumpus> c++ is already too much voodoo
5552018-05-10T19:27:12 <BlueMatt> true, fuck voodoo
5562018-05-10T19:27:20 <sipa> let's switch to BASIC
5572018-05-10T19:27:33 * jonasschnelli ...
5582018-05-10T19:27:40 <BlueMatt> though absolutely NACK 13062 unless there is demonstrated branch that is realisticly-mergeable that uses it
5592018-05-10T19:27:41 <cfields> anyway, it got me wondering if it'd be worthwhile to change the p2p format to be more agreeable with allocations
5602018-05-10T19:27:50 <sipa> BlueMatt: :(
5612018-05-10T19:27:52 <cfields> (next time we're changing something that is, not for this alone)
5622018-05-10T19:27:59 <sipa> BlueMatt: i completely disagree :)
5632018-05-10T19:28:10 * BlueMatt isnt generally a huge fan of making everything a span, its just a ton more complexity
5642018-05-10T19:28:25 <jonasschnelli> cfields: can you make an example for the p2p allocation issue?
5652018-05-10T19:28:25 <BlueMatt> and with C++ very easy to fuck up references and have them break
5662018-05-10T19:28:27 <sipa> not everything will become a span?
5672018-05-10T19:28:37 <sipa> spans are only used temporarily
5682018-05-10T19:28:46 <cfields> BlueMatt: how so? Seems absolutely necessary to me if we're ever going to untangle our subsystems
5692018-05-10T19:28:54 <jonasschnelli> cfields: you mean things like inv size comes before the acctual inv data?
5702018-05-10T19:28:56 <wumpus> I am a fan of making everything a span, at least for the inner processing, obviously not to keep hold of the data
5712018-05-10T19:29:01 <BlueMatt> sure, of course, but I see no reason to be moving the script interpreter to a generic Span thing vs using a CScript type unless there is demonstrated use
5722018-05-10T19:29:03 <sipa> exactly
5732018-05-10T19:29:05 <cfields> jonasschnelli: right
5742018-05-10T19:29:12 <sipa> it's abstracting representation from processing
5752018-05-10T19:29:20 <BlueMatt> why? if its just operating on a CScript, it should just operate on a CScript
5762018-05-10T19:29:26 <wumpus> I've always found that wedding CScript to a specific backing storage type was a bad idea
5772018-05-10T19:29:29 <jonasschnelli> Stumbled over this today.
5782018-05-10T19:29:46 <BlueMatt> I mean you can template it if you want :p
5792018-05-10T19:29:54 * sipa jumps off bridge
5802018-05-10T19:30:00 <wumpus> it implies lots of extra allocations and copying
5812018-05-10T19:30:17 <cfields> BlueMatt: if something is just dumb bytes, why not represent it that way?
5822018-05-10T19:30:17 <BlueMatt> sipa: that was obviously a joke
5832018-05-10T19:30:24 <sipa> BlueMatt: so was my jumping :)
5842018-05-10T19:30:25 <BlueMatt> its not just dumb bytes
5852018-05-10T19:30:26 <luke-jr> wumpus: enough to actually be an issue?
5862018-05-10T19:30:36 <sipa> a script is just dumb bytes
5872018-05-10T19:30:50 <sipa> any sequence of bytes is a valid scriptPubKey at least
5882018-05-10T19:30:52 <wumpus> right - it's simply a span of bytes
5892018-05-10T19:31:09 <BlueMatt> yea, I mean ok, sure, dont disagree in principal, but I /really/ hate taking references to things in C++
5902018-05-10T19:31:20 <sipa> ok
5912018-05-10T19:31:24 <cfields> also, I love the idea of a MultiSpan for batched operations
5922018-05-10T19:31:25 <BlueMatt> oops, something realloc'd and now we're executing uninitialized memory
5932018-05-10T19:31:45 <sipa> BlueMatt: c++ already uses references for ~everything
5942018-05-10T19:32:08 <BlueMatt> kinda, at least you're taking an iterator and its clear whats going on, introduce a new type and we start passing them around in the script executor and.....
5952018-05-10T19:32:10 <wumpus> cfields: scatter gather lists?
5962018-05-10T19:32:24 <BlueMatt> when its Execute(script, script) you know the thing is fine cause you're giving it a reference to the byte storage
5972018-05-10T19:32:42 <cfields> wumpus: right.
5982018-05-10T19:32:43 <BlueMatt> not an object that holds a refernece to it that was created sometime in the past
5992018-05-10T19:32:49 <sipa> and now it will be Execute(Span(script), Span(script))
6002018-05-10T19:32:51 <BlueMatt> cfields: can we not?
6012018-05-10T19:32:54 <sipa> same thing.
6022018-05-10T19:32:59 <cfields> BlueMatt: hmm?
6032018-05-10T19:33:20 <BlueMatt> no, it'll be push_to_background_thread(Span(script), Span(script))
6042018-05-10T19:33:30 <sipa> maybe
6052018-05-10T19:33:40 <BlueMatt> and more layers makes it less easy to see exactly whats going on
6062018-05-10T19:33:49 <wumpus> you can still copy of spans are the API
6072018-05-10T19:33:52 <wumpus> it doesn't restrict you in that
6082018-05-10T19:34:03 <wumpus> it just gives the *option* to use a direct memory buffer
6092018-05-10T19:34:03 <BlueMatt> hmm?
6102018-05-10T19:34:06 <sipa> you'd pass script down everything
6112018-05-10T19:34:14 <wumpus> just copy a vector and make a span to it
6122018-05-10T19:34:14 <cfields> fwiw, it'd be possible to add an aliasing shared_ptr into Span (or a different SafeSpan maybe) which would keep its owner from deallocating
6132018-05-10T19:34:16 <sipa> and only when invoking the execution logic you create a span
6142018-05-10T19:34:18 <BlueMatt> yes, I get it, and I like the option...when we have a user
6152018-05-10T19:34:22 <cfields> that seems wrong though.
6162018-05-10T19:34:56 <sipa> anyway, i'd like to start by making scriotSig a different type than scriptPubKey
6172018-05-10T19:34:59 <BlueMatt> I mean I'm fine with a refactor that doesnt change the exposed interface as step 1
6182018-05-10T19:35:00 <wumpus> I really don't see why not to do it, but anyhow
6192018-05-10T19:35:09 <sipa> there are a few more changes to do before that is possible
6202018-05-10T19:35:16 <BlueMatt> and have a wrapper in executor.cpp that just calls EvalScript(Span(arg1), Span(arg2))
6212018-05-10T19:35:24 <sipa> as the scriot executiin is not the only thing we do with scripts
6222018-05-10T19:35:30 <Odin> anybody has a cfw for antminer s5 or s7?
6232018-05-10T19:35:39 <BlueMatt> also, it'd be nice to have a type check on ScriptSig/ScriptPUbKey types in the public interface :p
6242018-05-10T19:35:43 <sipa> Odin: not here, go away
6252018-05-10T19:35:50 <wumpus> Odin: I've replied to this before, go away
6262018-05-10T19:35:57 *** drexl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6272018-05-10T19:36:08 <cfields> BlueMatt: type check?
6282018-05-10T19:36:19 <Odin> where I can find that, what room you suggest?
6292018-05-10T19:36:26 <jonasschnelli> Odin: #bitcoin
6302018-05-10T19:36:26 <BlueMatt> cfields: well if we make scriptpubkey + scriptsig different types, you cant pass them in the wrong order to EvalScript :p
6312018-05-10T19:36:58 <cfields> ...I'm pretty sure you'd know quickly enough
6322018-05-10T19:37:01 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6332018-05-10T19:37:28 <BlueMatt> the libbitcoinconsensus wrapper in rust was the wrong way around for like 3 months, and had users :p
6342018-05-10T19:37:36 <BlueMatt> (turns out that mostly just results in it always returning true)
6352018-05-10T19:37:40 <sipa> "users"
6362018-05-10T19:38:25 <sipa> anyway, no reason to discuss this further i think
6372018-05-10T19:38:27 <cfields> completely thread/memory safe though :p
6382018-05-10T19:38:44 <sipa> there will be reasons that type/execution separation will be useful for
6392018-05-10T19:38:53 <cfields> agreed, thanks. Just wanted a bit of general discussion around it.
6402018-05-10T19:39:02 <sipa> (prevector for scriotSig is reaaally bad)
6412018-05-10T19:40:00 <wumpus> #topic review coordination (jimpo)
6422018-05-10T19:40:43 <jimpo> so this might just be clarifying what hi pri is
6432018-05-10T19:40:51 <jimpo> my understanding is it's blockers on longer term things
6442018-05-10T19:40:58 <jimpo> and mostly more established contributors
6452018-05-10T19:40:58 <wumpus> that's the intent, yes
6462018-05-10T19:41:16 <jimpo> I think there's space for another list of things that have been concept ack'ed for people to review
6472018-05-10T19:41:24 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
6482018-05-10T19:41:35 <sipa> bitcoinacks.com ? :)
6492018-05-10T19:41:35 <jimpo> so that no everyone is reviewing different stuff and there's some actual coordination
6502018-05-10T19:41:47 <jimpo> Yes, bitcoinacks.com is great
6512018-05-10T19:42:03 <jimpo> I'm curious if people think there should be more of a process around this
6522018-05-10T19:42:05 <wumpus> the current list is already not working well, I don't really want to add another project
6532018-05-10T19:42:11 <wumpus> yes bitcoinacks is great
6542018-05-10T19:42:13 <sipa> but yes, i agree - having a better overview on what is concept acks (anf similarly, encouraging people to concept ack/nack quickly) would be good
6552018-05-10T19:42:17 <BlueMatt> apparently it doesnt distinguish between nacks and acks
6562018-05-10T19:42:21 <sipa> ha.
6572018-05-10T19:42:26 <jonasschnelli> pf.
6582018-05-10T19:42:39 <wumpus> lol that's an interesting bug
6592018-05-10T19:42:53 <sipa> "nack" "nack" "nack" "merged!"
6602018-05-10T19:42:56 <jonasschnelli> who maintains bitcoinacks.com?
6612018-05-10T19:43:03 <BlueMatt> pierre, apparently
6622018-05-10T19:43:09 <jonasschnelli> pierre r.?
6632018-05-10T19:43:12 <jimpo> yeah
6642018-05-10T19:43:12 <BlueMatt> yes
6652018-05-10T19:43:36 <jimpo> wumpus: I have thoughts, but why do you say the current list isn't working well?
6662018-05-10T19:43:42 <jonasschnelli> Lets try to get some feature in. I think an additional layer over github would really help
6672018-05-10T19:43:59 <BlueMatt> jimpo: it generates very little actual review
6682018-05-10T19:44:09 <jonasschnelli> jimpo: people do not review it "with high priority"
6692018-05-10T19:44:25 <jonasschnelli> I think this is also because of the nature of OSS
6702018-05-10T19:44:25 <wumpus> jimpo: this comes up every meeting, so I don't particularly like to discuss it, but it doesn't attract very much review. Also because the things that end up there tend to be large, complex, hard to review changes.
6712018-05-10T19:44:42 <jimpo> so does that mean 1) people don't want to review 2) people don't want to review large/hard changes 3) the list isn't actually hi pri?
6722018-05-10T19:44:51 <wumpus> yes, it's the nature of OSS, people can review or not review whatever they want
6732018-05-10T19:45:12 <BlueMatt> also reviewing small things is easier, and we've had an influx of small prs over the past 6+ months
6742018-05-10T19:45:16 <jonasschnelli> People want to review it,.. but maybe have other priorities?
6752018-05-10T19:45:39 <jimpo> I realize this comes up a lot, but that's because it's a big problem IMO
6762018-05-10T19:46:02 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: they might just not understand the change well enough
6772018-05-10T19:46:11 <jimpo> the solution might be just reducing the number of large changes in the hi pri list and prioritizing smaller ones that are more likely to get merged
6782018-05-10T19:46:14 <promag> jimpo: 4) some require deep understanding 5) usually UI stuff has fewer reviews
6792018-05-10T19:46:16 <BlueMatt> its not clear there's a solution, the problem is motivation and time to review big changes, and more lists doesnt help with that
6802018-05-10T19:46:16 <jonasschnelli> wumpus: and that...
6812018-05-10T19:46:32 <BlueMatt> jimpo: even weeks with fewer entries dont get more review
6822018-05-10T19:47:12 <jimpo> What if it was a list of 1?
6832018-05-10T19:47:19 <wumpus> maybe more entries is better -> not everyone is able to review the same things!
6842018-05-10T19:47:43 <jimpo> wumpus: yeah, true...
6852018-05-10T19:48:19 <jimpo> My main point is that if everyone is reviewing different stuff because there's no coordination, then reviews go to waste
6862018-05-10T19:48:20 <wumpus> jimpo: then what? and who decides anyway? the point is now that everyone can have a PR on there that's blocking them, that should foster cooporation
6872018-05-10T19:48:28 <MarcoFalke> Just as a side note: I try to respect the high priority pull requests when I merge things and avoid merging if they create a merge conflict with one of them
6882018-05-10T19:50:10 <jimpo> How do other people decide what to review if it's not on the hi pri list?
6892018-05-10T19:50:14 <wumpus> jimpo: you could ask someone to review your PR and you'd review theirs
6902018-05-10T19:50:32 <wumpus> depending on what they find interesting or they see as their part of the code
6912018-05-10T19:50:51 <sipa> jimpo: i generally sort by recently modified
6922018-05-10T19:51:45 <MarcoFalke> Agree with wumpus, currently the best way to get review is to find contributors in your "area" and trade review with them
6932018-05-10T19:52:01 <MarcoFalke> And coordinate with them what should go in in what order
6942018-05-10T19:52:06 <jonasschnelli> jimpo: also, every contributor has its own "roadmap". The high-prio list was usually "one PR per contributor" to "share the roadmap"
6952018-05-10T19:52:06 <promag> what MarcoFalke said, git blame and ping the guys here
6962018-05-10T19:52:20 <luke-jr> jimpo: personally, I just browse the PR list
6972018-05-10T19:52:51 <achow101> I don't do review :/
6982018-05-10T19:53:06 <wumpus> I tend to pay most attention to bugfixes, RPC changes, GUI and networking things
6992018-05-10T19:53:11 <promag> achow101: its' great
7002018-05-10T19:53:17 <jimpo> OK, I don't have much more to say on the topic other than that I think it would be more helpful if there were more clarity around who needs to review what and what should get review.
7012018-05-10T19:53:43 <wumpus> everything on the PR list needs review
7022018-05-10T19:53:47 <wumpus> otherwise it should be closed
7032018-05-10T19:53:50 <wumpus> or merged
7042018-05-10T19:53:56 <jonasschnelli> jimpo: what do you mean with *needs to review" ?
7052018-05-10T19:54:01 <jimpo> Personally, I'd just be interested in reviewing whatever needs review, so I try to go through the hi pri list.
7062018-05-10T19:54:30 <jimpo> Like, if there's a PR and it won't be merged until at least n of this set of loose owners reviews it.
7072018-05-10T19:54:40 <jimpo> then, eventually they need to weigh in
7082018-05-10T19:54:43 <wumpus> the point of the PR list is to keep track of what needs review, it's crazy that there's so much on there now, but we can't really help it
7092018-05-10T19:55:15 <promag> jimpo: IMO you should try to see all PR's
7102018-05-10T19:55:17 <luke-jr> right, all open PRs need review
7112018-05-10T19:55:22 <jonasschnelli> Yes. Even a full time reviewer like promag could not bring down the open PR #
7122018-05-10T19:55:24 <luke-jr> otherwise they wouldn't be open
7132018-05-10T19:55:32 <wumpus> and as said, it helps to ping people that edited the code before you, they probaly know the code
7142018-05-10T19:56:14 <BlueMatt> jimpo: I agree, the million-papercut-pr review approach doesnt get us anywhere as a project
7152018-05-10T19:56:22 <BlueMatt> reviewing things on the highprio list does, at least to me
7162018-05-10T19:56:27 <jimpo> if the entire PR list is valid and there's limited time for reviews and we are not willing to close stuff quickly, then there's just a fundamental problem
7172018-05-10T19:56:37 <BlueMatt> I generally try to get through the high prio list once a week, though often fail
7182018-05-10T19:56:46 <wumpus> a lot of open source projects don't have PR lists at all, for example the freedesktop projects have a mailing list where patches are posted, and the poster of the patch has the responsibility to cc: people that are relevant for review
7192018-05-10T19:57:05 <wumpus> the 'dump everyone on a list' approach of github doesn't scale that well
7202018-05-10T19:57:14 <promag> the PR's just sit there waiting for feedback.. sometimes a concept ACK can help push it forward
7212018-05-10T19:57:16 <jonasschnelli> at least the have no unicorns. :/
7222018-05-10T19:57:22 <jimpo> well, I'm basically proposing a ranking
7232018-05-10T19:57:32 <promag> otherwise people keep submitting PR's
7242018-05-10T19:57:46 <jonasschnelli> Not sure if a "global" ranking is possible.
7252018-05-10T19:57:46 <promag> who ranks?
7262018-05-10T19:57:48 <wumpus> jimpo: if you have specific proposals on what to close, feel free to let me know
7272018-05-10T19:57:51 <jonasschnelli> Because that would assume we have central planing
7282018-05-10T19:57:58 <promag> ^
7292018-05-10T19:58:02 <jimpo> # of concept acks is a ranking
7302018-05-10T19:58:09 <jimpo> which bitcoinacks.com is helpful for
7312018-05-10T19:58:31 <promag> but if you only see hp then thats biased..
7322018-05-10T19:59:14 <jonasschnelli> Could one say a concept ACK of sipa has the same "value" as one from John Doe?
7332018-05-10T19:59:15 *** owowo has quit IRC
7342018-05-10T19:59:39 <MarcoFalke> That is up to you to decide.
7352018-05-10T19:59:40 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: people longer in the projects are seen to hae more expertise
7362018-05-10T19:59:58 <MarcoFalke> Assign a ranking to each Concept ACK :p
7372018-05-10T20:00:01 <wumpus> if 1000 sybil accounts show up and ack something, we'd obviously not fall for that
7382018-05-10T20:00:05 <BlueMatt> whatever, I dont think we're making any more progress this week than we have the last 10 times we've discussed this
7392018-05-10T20:00:12 <jonasschnelli> But I kinda understand jimpo. We should extend bitcoinacks and make it flexible in terms of "getting the ranked list".
7402018-05-10T20:00:20 <wumpus> I agree, this is too meta of a topic, it's not constructive
7412018-05-10T20:00:24 <wumpus> #endmeeting
7422018-05-10T20:00:24 <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu May 10 20:00:24 2018 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
7432018-05-10T20:00:24 <lightningbot> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-10-19.00.html
7442018-05-10T20:00:24 <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-10-19.00.txt
7452018-05-10T20:00:24 <lightningbot> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-10-19.00.log.html
7462018-05-10T20:00:27 <promag> I've seen some projects where PR's just automatically close after some inactivity.. then the author can reopen
7472018-05-10T20:00:55 <jonasschnelli> Yes. We do that manually...
7482018-05-10T20:01:00 <jonasschnelli> But should probably do that more often
7492018-05-10T20:01:16 <wumpus> again, if there's anything you think that should be closed, let me know and I'll look at it
7502018-05-10T20:01:22 <promag> we have 267 open PR's..
7512018-05-10T20:01:27 <wumpus> I don't have the time nor energy to keep on top of the PR list, if that was even humanly possible
7522018-05-10T20:01:33 <promag> and counting
7532018-05-10T20:01:45 <BlueMatt> wumpus: I dont think it has been for at least 6 months :/
7542018-05-10T20:01:59 <luke-jr> maybe auto-close after a week of needing rebase?
7552018-05-10T20:02:02 <wumpus> BlueMatt: right
7562018-05-10T20:02:04 <MarcoFalke> Is there a way to block people from creating pull requests if they have too many outstanding ones?
7572018-05-10T20:02:10 <luke-jr> problem is GitHub doesn't let authors reopen..
7582018-05-10T20:02:13 <MarcoFalke> I guess that'd be helpful
7592018-05-10T20:02:34 <promag> luke-jr: oh
7602018-05-10T20:02:38 <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: "you can't work because others aren't"? :P
7612018-05-10T20:02:45 <MarcoFalke> And then a note saying "Please trade review"
7622018-05-10T20:03:17 <promag> but that's also unfair, I think that closing should happen because of nacks
7632018-05-10T20:03:27 <skeees> RCO - review coin?
7642018-05-10T20:03:37 <luke-jr> skeees: I was thinking about joking that..
7652018-05-10T20:03:39 <jonasschnelli> heh... do an ICO, quick!
7662018-05-10T20:03:55 <luke-jr> it might be helpful if users had an easy way to put bounties on review of PRs they like
7672018-05-10T20:03:56 <wumpus> promag: ideally, yes, though if no one is interested in a change, it'd make sense to close it too
7682018-05-10T20:04:19 <wumpus> promag: I usually close my own PRs after a while if they don't get review or discussion, but many other people are not doing that
7692018-05-10T20:04:37 <luke-jr> of course, then we might get the problem of false reviews to collect it :/
7702018-05-10T20:04:39 <promag> wumpus: yeah I also want to close some of mines
7712018-05-10T20:04:54 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7722018-05-10T20:05:24 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag closed pull request #11515: Assert cs_main is held when retrieving node state (master...201710-node-state-guard) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11515
7732018-05-10T20:05:47 <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: Then you stop trading reviews with that person ;)
7742018-05-10T20:06:10 <luke-jr> as soon as I get a chance, I'm hoping to go through mine and rebase/close as appropriate
7752018-05-10T20:06:15 <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: how do you even detect it?
7762018-05-10T20:06:34 <wumpus> I don't think we have to be so afraid of fake reviews by serious devs
7772018-05-10T20:06:34 <promag> wumpus: I still think an explicit ack/nack is better than "timeout"
7782018-05-10T20:06:48 <wumpus> promag: I also think so, but it's not always what you can hope for
7792018-05-10T20:07:08 <luke-jr> wumpus: no, just fake reviews from newbie devs after users put a bounty on it
7802018-05-10T20:07:47 <wumpus> promag: in open source it's sometimes necessary to be somewhat pushy with changes, promote them, and if still no one is interested well that's it, at some point it makes no sense to keep working on it
7812018-05-10T20:07:54 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12935: Add ProcessOrphans (move-only) (master...Mf1804-ProcessOrphans) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12935
7822018-05-10T20:08:13 <promag> wumpus: yeah I usually beg for merge right? :P
7832018-05-10T20:08:32 <wumpus> promag: it's easier to get attention for changes that are end-user visible
7842018-05-10T20:08:49 <wumpus> e.g. someone really wants a certain RPC call and is willing to test it
7852018-05-10T20:09:19 <wumpus> optimizations also tend to attract review quickly
7862018-05-10T20:09:36 <luke-jr> I wonder if it would be helpful or harmful to encourage non-devs to test stuff more
7872018-05-10T20:09:37 <wumpus> unless the code changes are very complex and big
7882018-05-10T20:10:27 <wumpus> luke-jr: we usually do that, for GUI changes
7892018-05-10T20:10:38 <BlueMatt> I mean part of my goal with high-prio was "everyone gets to make some progress on one of their pr's once a week", but it seems no one else wanted to use it that way, and that's fine, but unless people have new suggestiotns, its not worth discussing these things anymore, I think
7902018-05-10T20:10:43 <BlueMatt> maybe we should have a rule against them at meeting
7912018-05-10T20:10:45 <wumpus> but GUI changes are, everything considered, already easy to get merged
7922018-05-10T20:11:21 <promag> wumpus: for instance #12578
7932018-05-10T20:11:23 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12578 | Add transaction record type Fee by promag · Pull Request #12578 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
7942018-05-10T20:11:52 <promag> should be merged or closed?
7952018-05-10T20:12:06 <wumpus> (test changes are also, usually, either quickly merged or quickly rejected)
7962018-05-10T20:12:34 <wumpus> promag: for that it makes a lot of sense to let some non-dev users test
7972018-05-10T20:12:45 <wumpus> promag: whether the new transaction list format is desirable/useful
7982018-05-10T20:13:15 <wumpus> promag: maybe jonasschnelli can do a build there
7992018-05-10T20:13:40 <promag> some non-dev users test <- rarely seen right?
8002018-05-10T20:13:47 <wumpus> BlueMatt: I agree
8012018-05-10T20:13:57 <wumpus> promag: well try to find someone that is interested in your change!
8022018-05-10T20:14:31 <MarcoFalke> Right, GUI changes also need testing from GUI users.
8032018-05-10T20:14:40 <luke-jr> promag: well, lots of PRs get into Knots, so it could be a matter of getting those users to report on their issues or lack thereof
8042018-05-10T20:14:53 <wumpus> promag: I"m sure you can find people to at least discuss about whether this change is desirable or not?
8052018-05-10T20:15:19 <wumpus> promag: it's not some obscure checkbox that moves somewhere else, but the layout of the transaction list, people will care about this
8062018-05-10T20:17:25 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8072018-05-10T20:18:20 <promag> wumpus: well I don't really care about that, I just think it makes sense but I also can close it..
8082018-05-10T20:19:09 <wumpus> I mean you could ask on reddit, or twitter, or whereever GUI users are, I think the problem on github is that no one really has much opinion on the GUI as long as it keeps working :-)
8092018-05-10T20:20:28 <MarcoFalke> On firefox the mobile mode is on CTRL+SHIFT+M
8102018-05-10T20:20:38 <MarcoFalke> You can set a custom device
8112018-05-10T20:20:44 <MarcoFalke> Or just modify the UA
8122018-05-10T20:20:50 <wumpus> promag: I've concept ACK'ed it FWIW
8132018-05-10T20:21:08 <luke-jr> wumpus: I use and have an opinion that it's dumb to have 2 lines for every tx :P
8142018-05-10T20:21:35 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
8152018-05-10T20:21:41 <wumpus> luke-jr: you did concept ACK it, maybe retract that then?
8162018-05-10T20:22:38 <luke-jr> Well, it makes sense for sendmanys
8172018-05-10T20:24:06 <wumpus> wouldn't expanding the fee only for sendmanys be inconsistent?
8182018-05-10T20:24:22 <promag> luke-jr: you think the fee should be "associated" to the destinatino?
8192018-05-10T20:24:38 <luke-jr> promag: not really
8202018-05-10T20:24:45 <wumpus> I mean it might seem silly but there's certainly some precedent in billing to have separate rows for fees
8212018-05-10T20:25:20 <luke-jr> Maybe a checkbox to show/hide fees or something would make sense
8222018-05-10T20:25:38 <promag> right, what I think could work well is to aggregate the fee outside the table
8232018-05-10T20:25:44 <luke-jr> or even just an extra column
8242018-05-10T20:25:49 <wumpus> then again I don't care so deeply I really want to argue either for or against this
8252018-05-10T20:26:08 <promag> luke-jr: with extra column and multisend, which row you put the fee?
8262018-05-10T20:26:16 <luke-jr> (for tax purposes, I found I have to use JSON-RPC to get useful data)
8272018-05-10T20:26:22 <wumpus> would vote against adding extra columns
8282018-05-10T20:28:28 <promag> anyway, a clear case of lack of feedback
8292018-05-10T20:29:28 <luke-jr> I suppose bank statements do show fees separately - they're just uncommon in general
8302018-05-10T20:29:38 *** moneyball has quit IRC
8312018-05-10T20:29:44 <promag> luke-jr: right
8322018-05-10T20:29:57 <promag> but my point is consistency with listransactions
8332018-05-10T20:30:32 <promag> amounts are different
8342018-05-10T20:30:44 <luke-jr> listtransactions doesn't have separate rows for fees
8352018-05-10T20:32:03 <promag> right, but it doesn't sum amount and fee
8362018-05-10T20:32:06 <Odin> what it's the best pool for btc, not slush, prohashing or antpool
8372018-05-10T20:32:14 <promag> bye Odin
8382018-05-10T20:33:04 *** Odin has left #bitcoin-core-dev
8392018-05-10T20:33:20 <luke-jr> if we want to imitate listtransactions, that would suggest an extra column (which wumpus doesn't like)
8402018-05-10T20:33:26 <luke-jr> wumpus: what if it was hidden by default?
8412018-05-10T20:33:48 <wumpus> there are already so many columns, I think adding more would be against user friendly UI design, then again I don't have a dog in that fight
8422018-05-10T20:34:06 <wumpus> sure, you could do optional columns
8432018-05-10T20:37:18 *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8442018-05-10T20:39:12 *** Randolf has quit IRC
8452018-05-10T20:41:05 <luke-jr> how about an option? "Show fees: Not at all; As an extra column; Included in amount"
8462018-05-10T20:41:22 <luke-jr> hopefully it will become obvious which of the latter two is preferred with time
8472018-05-10T20:48:06 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
8482018-05-10T20:48:48 <wumpus> making everything an option because we just can't decide :)
8492018-05-10T20:49:14 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8502018-05-10T20:51:49 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8512018-05-10T20:52:06 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8522018-05-10T20:54:00 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8532018-05-10T20:54:33 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8542018-05-10T20:56:22 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8552018-05-10T20:56:32 *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8562018-05-10T20:58:29 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8572018-05-10T20:59:00 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8582018-05-10T21:00:44 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
8592018-05-10T21:11:54 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8602018-05-10T21:12:11 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8612018-05-10T21:14:31 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
8622018-05-10T21:17:12 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8632018-05-10T21:17:29 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8642018-05-10T21:19:24 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8652018-05-10T21:20:03 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8662018-05-10T21:20:58 *** Randolf has quit IRC
8672018-05-10T21:22:47 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8682018-05-10T21:23:54 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8692018-05-10T21:25:16 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8702018-05-10T21:29:36 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
8712018-05-10T21:30:48 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8722018-05-10T21:31:05 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8732018-05-10T21:32:09 *** promag has quit IRC
8742018-05-10T21:33:59 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8752018-05-10T21:34:16 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8762018-05-10T21:38:11 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8772018-05-10T21:38:40 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8782018-05-10T21:40:36 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8792018-05-10T21:40:54 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8802018-05-10T21:43:58 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8812018-05-10T21:44:15 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8822018-05-10T21:48:10 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8832018-05-10T21:48:39 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8842018-05-10T21:51:33 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8852018-05-10T21:51:50 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8862018-05-10T21:55:45 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8872018-05-10T21:56:22 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8882018-05-10T21:59:17 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8892018-05-10T21:59:46 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8902018-05-10T22:02:40 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8912018-05-10T22:03:07 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8922018-05-10T22:03:45 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8932018-05-10T22:06:01 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8942018-05-10T22:06:18 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8952018-05-10T22:07:57 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
8962018-05-10T22:08:47 *** Krellan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8972018-05-10T22:09:24 *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8982018-05-10T22:11:13 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
8992018-05-10T22:11:30 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9002018-05-10T22:11:54 *** Krellan has quit IRC
9012018-05-10T22:13:01 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1c582503507b...cb9bbf77726a
9022018-05-10T22:13:01 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5d53661 John Newbery: [tests] Remove 'account' API from wallet functional tests...
9032018-05-10T22:13:02 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cb9bbf7 MarcoFalke: Merge #13075: [tests] Remove 'account' API from wallet functional tests...
9042018-05-10T22:13:41 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13075: [tests] Remove 'account' API from wallet functional tests (master...remove_functional_tests_accounts) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13075
9052018-05-10T22:14:57 *** drexl has quit IRC
9062018-05-10T22:19:08 *** Krellan_ has quit IRC
9072018-05-10T22:20:25 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9082018-05-10T22:20:42 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9092018-05-10T22:21:51 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
9102018-05-10T22:25:36 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9112018-05-10T22:25:53 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9122018-05-10T22:27:50 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9132018-05-10T22:28:07 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9142018-05-10T22:29:01 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9152018-05-10T22:31:02 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9162018-05-10T22:31:39 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9172018-05-10T22:33:33 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9182018-05-10T22:33:37 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9192018-05-10T22:33:50 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9202018-05-10T22:37:45 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9212018-05-10T22:38:19 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9222018-05-10T22:40:29 *** dx25 has quit IRC
9232018-05-10T22:41:24 *** dx25 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9242018-05-10T22:41:51 *** User__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9252018-05-10T22:42:40 *** ken2812221 has quit IRC
9262018-05-10T22:42:55 *** Squidicc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9272018-05-10T22:44:23 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9282018-05-10T22:44:28 *** Squidicuz has quit IRC
9292018-05-10T22:44:41 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9302018-05-10T22:45:33 *** User__ has quit IRC
9312018-05-10T22:45:56 *** ken2812221 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9322018-05-10T22:48:40 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
9332018-05-10T22:50:11 *** Randolf has quit IRC
9342018-05-10T22:51:11 *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9352018-05-10T22:51:27 *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
9362018-05-10T22:52:11 *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9372018-05-10T22:52:35 *** gmaxwell is now known as Guest44828
9382018-05-10T22:53:44 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9392018-05-10T22:54:31 *** spinza has quit IRC
9402018-05-10T22:55:57 *** Randolf has quit IRC
9412018-05-10T22:58:09 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
9422018-05-10T23:03:01 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
9432018-05-10T23:04:13 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9442018-05-10T23:08:36 *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9452018-05-10T23:09:41 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
9462018-05-10T23:11:58 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9472018-05-10T23:12:15 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9482018-05-10T23:15:11 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9492018-05-10T23:15:28 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9502018-05-10T23:15:58 *** cryptojanitor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9512018-05-10T23:19:32 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9522018-05-10T23:19:49 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9532018-05-10T23:22:43 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9542018-05-10T23:23:33 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9552018-05-10T23:27:09 *** zautomata has quit IRC
9562018-05-10T23:28:28 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9572018-05-10T23:28:45 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9582018-05-10T23:30:41 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9592018-05-10T23:31:07 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9602018-05-10T23:34:01 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9612018-05-10T23:34:18 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9622018-05-10T23:35:18 *** Randolf has quit IRC
9632018-05-10T23:35:55 *** Krellan has quit IRC
9642018-05-10T23:37:41 *** honeybadgerdgaf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9652018-05-10T23:42:58 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9662018-05-10T23:43:24 *** promag has quit IRC
9672018-05-10T23:45:13 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9682018-05-10T23:45:30 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9692018-05-10T23:47:34 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
9702018-05-10T23:48:31 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9712018-05-10T23:50:24 *** arowser_ has quit IRC
9722018-05-10T23:50:35 *** zautomata has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9732018-05-10T23:51:24 *** glaksmono has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9742018-05-10T23:53:01 *** arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9752018-05-10T23:55:27 *** glaksmono has quit IRC
9762018-05-10T23:57:20 *** Dizzle has quit IRC
9772018-05-10T23:57:31 *** honeybadgerdgaf has quit IRC
9782018-05-10T23:59:08 *** honeybadgerdgaf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev