12018-05-24T00:54:28  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  22018-05-24T00:55:03  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  32018-05-24T00:58:13  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
  42018-05-24T00:59:18  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
  52018-05-24T01:00:44  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  62018-05-24T01:01:25  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
  72018-05-24T01:12:08  *** zivl has quit IRC
  82018-05-24T01:18:08  *** cryptojanitor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  92018-05-24T01:23:08  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 102018-05-24T01:31:39  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 112018-05-24T01:34:22  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 122018-05-24T01:39:26  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 132018-05-24T02:00:01  *** dx25 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 142018-05-24T02:01:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 152018-05-24T02:02:17  *** dx25 has quit IRC
 162018-05-24T02:04:50  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 172018-05-24T02:05:52  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 182018-05-24T02:10:50  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 192018-05-24T02:22:48  *** DougieBot5000_ is now known as DougieBot5000
 202018-05-24T02:23:41  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 212018-05-24T02:25:03  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 222018-05-24T02:53:43  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 232018-05-24T02:54:41  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 242018-05-24T02:56:27  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 252018-05-24T02:57:16  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 262018-05-24T03:00:51  *** murch1 has quit IRC
 272018-05-24T03:28:08  *** Nadav_Kohen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 282018-05-24T03:40:12  *** Nadav_Kohen has quit IRC
 292018-05-24T03:49:10  *** Nadav_Kohen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 302018-05-24T03:56:12  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 312018-05-24T03:56:25  *** Nadav_Kohen has quit IRC
 322018-05-24T04:00:31  *** Nadav_Kohen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 332018-05-24T04:06:36  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 342018-05-24T04:08:01  *** Nadav_Kohen has quit IRC
 352018-05-24T04:11:02  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 362018-05-24T04:17:42  *** cryptojanitor has quit IRC
 372018-05-24T04:42:19  *** Nadav_Kohen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 382018-05-24T04:54:57  *** Nadav_Kohen has quit IRC
 392018-05-24T04:58:08  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 402018-05-24T05:29:36  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 412018-05-24T05:36:06  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 422018-05-24T05:36:55  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 432018-05-24T06:06:58  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 442018-05-24T06:07:20  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 452018-05-24T06:11:27  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 462018-05-24T06:11:57  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 472018-05-24T06:12:08  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 482018-05-24T06:12:27  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 492018-05-24T06:33:57  *** jnewbery has quit IRC
 502018-05-24T06:34:27  *** zxzzt has quit IRC
 512018-05-24T06:35:11  *** jamesob has quit IRC
 522018-05-24T06:36:01  *** jnewbery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532018-05-24T06:36:26  *** zxzzt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 542018-05-24T06:36:34  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 552018-05-24T07:24:00  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 562018-05-24T07:29:38  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 572018-05-24T07:30:17  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 582018-05-24T07:33:20  *** zarez has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 592018-05-24T07:44:48  *** wolfspraul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 602018-05-24T07:50:52  *** JackH has quit IRC
 612018-05-24T08:03:55  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 622018-05-24T08:04:43  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: agree re 13253
 632018-05-24T08:06:50  <wumpus> getting the 0.16.1 release out should probably be priority now
 642018-05-24T08:07:57  *** JackH has quit IRC
 652018-05-24T08:12:08  <wumpus> moneyball: hahahahaha "double unicorn"
 662018-05-24T08:16:33  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 672018-05-24T08:17:05  <wumpus> moneyball: but good to know they're making progress. A really persistent one was jtimon's PR that I merged yesterday, #10757.
 682018-05-24T08:17:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10757 | RPC: Introduce getblockstats to plot things by jtimon · Pull Request #10757 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 692018-05-24T08:25:56  <fanquake> wumpus there are still a couple unclean/complicated backports to do.
 702018-05-24T08:26:00  <fanquake> Wondering if the people that PR'd the changes to master want to handle the backporting?
 712018-05-24T08:26:44  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 722018-05-24T08:26:49  <fanquake> wumpus Also if you're happy with it, I think #13246 is ready. I've tested, and it's a good cleanup.
 732018-05-24T08:26:51  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13246 | doc: Bump to Ubuntu Bionic 18.04 in build-windows.md by ken2812221 · Pull Request #13246 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 742018-05-24T08:30:07  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 752018-05-24T08:31:05  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 762018-05-24T08:32:15  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #13253: [0.16] Further Backports (0.16...0-16-further-backports) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13253
 772018-05-24T08:37:32  <wumpus> fanquake: I think it's preferable if the people that PRed the changes to master do that, yes
 782018-05-24T08:37:57  <wumpus> at the very least they'd need to review it carefully
 792018-05-24T08:39:55  *** lifeofguenter has quit IRC
 802018-05-24T08:40:05  *** JackH has quit IRC
 812018-05-24T08:40:23  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
 822018-05-24T08:43:57  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 832018-05-24T08:45:24  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 842018-05-24T08:45:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7f4db9a7c354...5c41b6008079
 852018-05-24T08:45:41  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9d4f942 Chun Kuan Lee: doc: Bump to Ubuntu Bionic 18.04 in build-windows.md...
 862018-05-24T08:45:42  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5c41b60 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13246: doc: Bump to Ubuntu Bionic 18.04 in build-windows.md...
 872018-05-24T08:46:09  <fanquake> wumpus I've added them to the "Blockers" in the High Prio list
 882018-05-24T08:46:27  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #13246: doc: Bump to Ubuntu Bionic 18.04 in build-windows.md (master...patch-2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13246
 892018-05-24T08:46:29  <fanquake> I think we can just about untag that one for 0.15.2
 902018-05-24T08:48:02  <kallewoof> Is there a good link to the high prio list? I always have a hard time finding it and keep a tab of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+project%3Abitcoin%2Fbitcoin%2F8 open, but not sure that URL changes at some point.
 912018-05-24T08:48:17  <kallewoof> "bitcoin/bitcoin/8" doesn't seem particularly permanent.
 922018-05-24T08:49:01  *** lifeofguenter has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 932018-05-24T08:49:15  <wumpus> fanquake: you mean the GUI settings dialog crash? yes, probably, I don't think it's so likely that we'll do a 0.15.x release anyway
 942018-05-24T08:50:07  <wumpus> kallewoof: pretty much all github URLs are permanent (for some definitions of permanent at least)
 952018-05-24T08:50:24  <fanquake> wumpus yep, I'll untag it
 962018-05-24T08:50:31  <wumpus> fanquake: already did
 972018-05-24T08:50:36  <fanquake> :o
 982018-05-24T08:51:03  <wumpus> kallewoof: '8' is the project ID which is not supposed to change
 992018-05-24T08:51:06  <fanquake> kallewoof I think https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8 is your best bet for now
1002018-05-24T08:53:22  <kallewoof> OK, thanks
1012018-05-24T08:53:29  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022018-05-24T08:56:27  *** lifeofguenter has quit IRC
1032018-05-24T08:56:51  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042018-05-24T08:57:23  *** raarr has quit IRC
1052018-05-24T09:00:39  *** lifeofguenter has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062018-05-24T09:02:05  *** JackH has quit IRC
1072018-05-24T09:07:25  *** intcat has quit IRC
1082018-05-24T09:07:56  *** dlb76 has quit IRC
1092018-05-24T09:08:10  *** wolfspraul has quit IRC
1102018-05-24T09:08:15  *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
1112018-05-24T09:08:17  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
1122018-05-24T09:08:31  *** fronti has quit IRC
1132018-05-24T09:09:06  *** AndyS2 has quit IRC
1142018-05-24T09:09:26  *** raarr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152018-05-24T09:11:53  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162018-05-24T09:12:33  <aj> kallewoof: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8 ?
1172018-05-24T09:13:02  <aj> ah, helps if you don't get lost in scrollback
1182018-05-24T09:13:29  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192018-05-24T09:15:08  *** fronti has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202018-05-24T09:15:42  *** jonasschnelli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212018-05-24T09:17:36  <promag> wumpus: #13063
1222018-05-24T09:17:38  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13063 | Use shared pointer to retain wallet instance by promag · Pull Request #13063 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1232018-05-24T09:19:42  *** dlb76 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242018-05-24T09:27:48  <wumpus> apparently there's a new "checks" thing on github PRs?
1252018-05-24T09:28:49  <wumpus> promag: thanks
1262018-05-24T09:30:07  <fanquake> wumpus yes, not quite sure what that's for yet
1272018-05-24T09:30:13  <promag> also #13160 could have more feedback
1282018-05-24T09:30:15  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13160 | wallet: Unlock spent outputs by promag · Pull Request #13160 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1292018-05-24T09:30:26  <fanquake> I wonder if it's for the linter type things we are currently running on Travis
1302018-05-24T09:30:38  <promag> fanquake: I guess integrations must update first?
1312018-05-24T09:31:00  *** murchandamus has quit IRC
1322018-05-24T09:32:27  <fanquake> promag Do you mean they will run before travis does?
1332018-05-24T09:34:14  <promag> fanquake: I mean apps (travis for instance) must update first to use checks
1342018-05-24T09:34:29  *** murchandamus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1352018-05-24T09:34:30  <promag> or we must update .travis.yml?
1362018-05-24T09:35:09  <fanquake> promag ah ok. I'll have a read up https://blog.github.com/2018-05-07-introducing-checks-api/
1372018-05-24T09:35:09  <promag> https://help.github.com/articles/about-status-checks/#checks
1382018-05-24T09:36:24  <promag> but looks like a nice feature
1392018-05-24T09:37:19  <fanquake> Also https://blog.travis-ci.com/2018-05-07-announcing-support-for-github-checks-api-on-travis-ci-com
1402018-05-24T09:38:08  <fanquake> Also Also, if anyone wasn't aware https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/open-source-on-travis-ci-com
1412018-05-24T09:39:58  <wumpus> seems like a nice feature, if it can list the failed checks in the PR instead of having to dig into the travis log every time
1422018-05-24T09:41:51  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432018-05-24T09:41:53  <wumpus> although having to look for 'apps' in a 'marketplace' seems kind of sily
1442018-05-24T09:42:48  <fanquake> heh
1452018-05-24T09:42:54  <wumpus> "
1462018-05-24T09:42:56  <wumpus> Organization owners and users with push access to a repository can create checks and statuses with GitHub's API. For more information, see "Checks" and "Statuses" in the GitHub Developer documentation."
1472018-05-24T09:47:27  <wumpus> so we could push *our own* statuses, funny. Though agree with promag it would be useful if this was integrated into, say, travis, to not have to run parallel checking infrastructure.
1482018-05-24T09:57:06  *** zivl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1492018-05-24T09:59:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5c41b6008079...6378eef18f61
1502018-05-24T09:59:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 80b4910 João Barbosa: wallet: Use shared pointer to retain wallet instance
1512018-05-24T09:59:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6378eef Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13063: Use shared pointer to retain wallet instance...
1522018-05-24T09:59:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #13063: Use shared pointer to retain wallet instance (master...2018-04-wallet-sharedptr) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13063
1532018-05-24T10:00:34  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1542018-05-24T10:04:04  <promag> wumpus: thanks, #13111 on high priority?
1552018-05-24T10:04:06  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13111 | [WIP] Add unloadwallet RPC by promag · Pull Request #13111 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1562018-05-24T10:05:22  <wumpus> I think we should try to keep high-priority discussion in the meetings
1572018-05-24T10:06:14  <wumpus> that makes sure at least everyone has an idea of what is added. I'm okay with adding one inbetween when there is really a hurry, but this even has a [WIP] tag still
1582018-05-24T10:07:41  <wumpus> also I think high priority == 0.16.1 now
1592018-05-24T10:11:08  <promag> wumpus: when is 0.17 feature freeze?
1602018-05-24T10:13:05  <wumpus> #12624
1612018-05-24T10:13:06  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12624 | Release schedule for 0.17.0 · Issue #12624 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1622018-05-24T10:21:35  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
1632018-05-24T10:28:59  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642018-05-24T10:31:03  *** intcat has quit IRC
1652018-05-24T10:34:45  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662018-05-24T10:36:17  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1672018-05-24T10:38:56  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
1682018-05-24T10:41:37  *** goofie has quit IRC
1692018-05-24T10:52:02  *** wolfspraul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702018-05-24T10:56:15  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1712018-05-24T10:59:00  <promag> tks
1722018-05-24T11:05:38  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
1732018-05-24T11:09:58  *** Randolf has quit IRC
1742018-05-24T11:11:08  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752018-05-24T11:14:34  *** dynamite421 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1762018-05-24T11:17:19  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
1772018-05-24T11:17:24  *** dynamite421 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1782018-05-24T11:18:25  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1792018-05-24T11:20:39  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1802018-05-24T11:36:07  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812018-05-24T12:03:03  *** Emcy has quit IRC
1822018-05-24T12:03:37  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
1832018-05-24T12:03:56  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1842018-05-24T12:09:59  *** promag has quit IRC
1852018-05-24T12:13:02  <fanquake> wumpus #13284 should be able to go in. Pretty trivial fix.
1862018-05-24T12:13:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13284 | gui: fix visual "overflow" of amount input. by brandonrninefive · Pull Request #13284 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1872018-05-24T12:15:57  *** Randolf has quit IRC
1882018-05-24T12:17:46  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1892018-05-24T12:21:57  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
1902018-05-24T12:29:08  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912018-05-24T12:29:19  *** m8tion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1922018-05-24T12:30:06  <wumpus> fanquake: will look at it, thanks
1932018-05-24T12:31:52  *** goofie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1942018-05-24T12:39:03  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1952018-05-24T12:49:07  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1962018-05-24T13:01:44  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1972018-05-24T13:04:22  *** Randolf has quit IRC
1982018-05-24T13:04:54  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1992018-05-24T13:08:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/6378eef18f61...a9b6957383a7
2002018-05-24T13:08:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c865ee1 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Fix FreeBSD build by including utilstrencodings.h...
2012018-05-24T13:08:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a9b6957 MarcoFalke: Merge #13314: Fix FreeBSD build by including utilstrencodings.h...
2022018-05-24T13:08:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13314: Fix FreeBSD build by including utilstrencodings.h (master...2018_05_freebsd_build) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13314
2032018-05-24T13:12:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a9b6957383a7...536120ec39be
2042018-05-24T13:12:40  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 97c112d Ben Woosley: Declare TorReply parsing functions in torcontrol_tests...
2052018-05-24T13:12:41  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 536120e MarcoFalke: Merge #13291: test: Don't include torcontrol.cpp into the test file...
2062018-05-24T13:13:16  *** m8tion has quit IRC
2072018-05-24T13:13:26  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13291: test: Don't include torcontrol.cpp into the test file (master...tor-reply) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13291
2082018-05-24T13:15:14  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2092018-05-24T13:17:15  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2102018-05-24T13:23:50  *** m8tion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2112018-05-24T13:28:39  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
2122018-05-24T13:33:10  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2132018-05-24T13:33:29  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2142018-05-24T13:35:32  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
2152018-05-24T13:36:51  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162018-05-24T13:39:30  *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
2172018-05-24T13:39:30  *** jonasschnelli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2182018-05-24T13:40:18  *** marcoagner has quit IRC
2192018-05-24T13:40:37  *** marcoagner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202018-05-24T13:42:27  *** Krellan has quit IRC
2212018-05-24T13:43:07  *** Randolf has quit IRC
2222018-05-24T13:43:21  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2232018-05-24T13:43:44  *** promag has quit IRC
2242018-05-24T13:44:37  *** Nadav_Kohen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2252018-05-24T13:44:41  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262018-05-24T13:53:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/536120ec39be...f8be43413368
2272018-05-24T13:53:01  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5f3cbde Brandon Ruggles: Increased max width of amount field to prevent number overflow bug.
2282018-05-24T13:53:01  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f8be434 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13284: gui: fix visual "overflow" of amount input....
2292018-05-24T13:53:46  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #13284: gui: fix visual "overflow" of amount input. (master...ui_amount_overflow_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13284
2302018-05-24T13:56:12  <fanquake> jonasschnelli I probably should have tested on Windows, but I've almost had enough of VMs for the day
2312018-05-24T13:56:26  <fanquake> If Windows is broken somehow it'll be the odd one out
2322018-05-24T13:58:55  <jonasschnelli> fanquake: heh!
2332018-05-24T14:04:06  *** tryphe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2342018-05-24T14:05:40  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2352018-05-24T14:05:41  <wumpus> ideally it'd use the font size, instead of a fixed width
2362018-05-24T14:06:02  <wumpus> but an improvement is an improvement...
2372018-05-24T14:07:17  *** tryphe has quit IRC
2382018-05-24T14:07:21  <wumpus> (but there is a qt function to compute font extents, which we use in some places, if this ever comes up as issue again we should use that)
2392018-05-24T14:11:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] FeedTheWeb opened pull request #13315: remove ZMQ message limit (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13315
2402018-05-24T14:12:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f8be43413368...610f4dd719ad
2412018-05-24T14:12:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa865ef MarcoFalke: qa: Fix wallet_listreceivedby race
2422018-05-24T14:12:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 610f4dd MarcoFalke: Merge #13304: qa: Fix wallet_listreceivedby race...
2432018-05-24T14:13:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13304: qa: Fix wallet_listreceivedby race (master...Mf1805-qaWalletRace) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13304
2442018-05-24T14:14:17  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452018-05-24T14:15:11  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2462018-05-24T14:17:13  *** zautomata has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472018-05-24T14:17:17  *** Oldnewbie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482018-05-24T14:17:21  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
2492018-05-24T14:17:55  *** ken2812221 has quit IRC
2502018-05-24T14:18:49  *** ken2812221 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512018-05-24T14:22:04  *** Oldnewbie has quit IRC
2522018-05-24T14:25:34  *** jtimon has quit IRC
2532018-05-24T14:27:29  <jnewbery> moneyball, jimpo: thanks for continuing to chase Github!
2542018-05-24T14:27:54  <jnewbery> I also got an email from Ben at Github with another workaround in case people are still having issues: https://0bin.net/paste/4maKKIx04UweS5rA#EvAA3aPuNEb8fRr8x+csVRwfjjS5VCmbP5Mn7r3OGvz
2552018-05-24T14:28:17  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562018-05-24T14:28:28  <jnewbery> append ?timeline_per_page=20 to the end of any PR URL
2572018-05-24T14:36:18  <wumpus> github has a way to restrict the number of posts per page? that's good to know
2582018-05-24T14:39:24  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592018-05-24T14:47:13  *** tryphe_000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602018-05-24T14:50:11  *** tryphe_ has quit IRC
2612018-05-24T14:54:06  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2622018-05-24T15:01:16  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2632018-05-24T15:08:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
2642018-05-24T15:11:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652018-05-24T15:13:48  *** stuffy1968 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2662018-05-24T15:16:37  *** fanquake has quit IRC
2672018-05-24T15:30:05  *** promag has quit IRC
2682018-05-24T15:30:18  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2692018-05-24T15:35:37  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
2702018-05-24T15:39:22  *** a5m0 has quit IRC
2712018-05-24T15:40:50  *** a5m0 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2722018-05-24T15:42:05  *** DrFeelGood has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732018-05-24T15:45:52  *** grafcaps has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742018-05-24T15:49:27  *** Randolf has quit IRC
2752018-05-24T15:52:16  *** Krellan has quit IRC
2762018-05-24T15:52:52  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2772018-05-24T16:03:25  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
2782018-05-24T16:04:00  *** promag has quit IRC
2792018-05-24T16:04:36  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802018-05-24T16:04:50  *** stuffy1968 has quit IRC
2812018-05-24T16:11:08  *** zarez has quit IRC
2822018-05-24T16:32:06  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2832018-05-24T16:34:36  *** tryphe_000 has quit IRC
2842018-05-24T16:35:04  *** tryphe_000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2852018-05-24T16:37:18  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2862018-05-24T16:40:13  <promag> jnewbery: #13111 begs for your review =)
2872018-05-24T16:40:15  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13111 | Add unloadwallet RPC by promag · Pull Request #13111 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2882018-05-24T16:48:09  <jnewbery> promag: Of course I will, in good time. I've just reviewed #13100, and I don't think there's a huge rush to review all the load/unload wallet PRs in parallel
2892018-05-24T16:48:12  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13100 | gui: Add menu entry to open wallet by promag · Pull Request #13100 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2902018-05-24T16:48:38  <promag> jnewbery: what should come first? menu entries or unload?
2912018-05-24T16:55:56  *** Nadav_Kohen has quit IRC
2922018-05-24T16:59:35  <jnewbery> I don't think it matters. I'm more concerned about not hogging reviewer/maintainer time.
2932018-05-24T16:59:52  <jnewbery> I got another update from Ben at Github: One more quick update, the performance improvement I mentioned also made it into production moments ago, so hopefully the URL argument workaround should be less-and-less necessary as well.
2942018-05-24T17:00:12  *** Krellan has quit IRC
2952018-05-24T17:02:46  *** m8tion has quit IRC
2962018-05-24T17:03:52  *** timothy has quit IRC
2972018-05-24T17:09:10  *** ExtraCrispy has quit IRC
2982018-05-24T17:17:50  *** murch1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2992018-05-24T17:32:40  *** promag has quit IRC
3002018-05-24T17:34:31  *** Nadav_Kohen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3012018-05-24T17:41:15  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #13317: [0.16.1] Remainig backports (0.16...Mf1805-016ForBackport) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13317
3022018-05-24T18:09:42  *** drexl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3032018-05-24T18:15:14  *** nmnkgl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3042018-05-24T18:16:26  *** Oldnewbie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3052018-05-24T18:23:56  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3062018-05-24T18:29:39  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3072018-05-24T18:42:52  *** MisterPaz has quit IRC
3082018-05-24T18:43:21  *** MrPaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3092018-05-24T18:47:43  <promag> jnewbery: I prefer unloading first, then UI actions can be added at the same time for both load and unload
3102018-05-24T18:48:02  *** MrPaz has quit IRC
3112018-05-24T18:52:22  <sipa> jimpo: in the raw data about bip 158, the second but last column is the number of entries in the basic filter
3122018-05-24T18:53:00  <sipa> is that the number of unique elements, or the total number? (i.e. does it count multiple identical scriptPubKeys once or multiple times?)
3132018-05-24T18:54:02  <jimpo> unique elements
3142018-05-24T18:54:41  <jimpo> if you want the raw data for the sub-filters (as being discussed on the mailing list), I have those too
3152018-05-24T18:55:16  <sipa> it seems the byte size is almost unbelievably close to the theoretical limit
3162018-05-24T18:55:40  <jimpo> yeah, 21 is the limit
3172018-05-24T18:56:17  <jimpo> I have a graph somewhere of average bitsize per element vs # of elements in a filter
3182018-05-24T18:56:51  <jimpo> it drops off very fast. at around 200 elements or so, I think it's already at 22 or 23 (need to double check that)
3192018-05-24T18:57:37  <sipa> jimpo: the limit is actually higher
3202018-05-24T18:58:03  <jimpo> oh? how's that?
3212018-05-24T18:58:53  <MarcoFalke> I cherry-picked the remaining backports here: #13317
3222018-05-24T18:58:55  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13317 | [0.16.1] Remainig backports by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13317 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3232018-05-24T18:59:23  <MarcoFalke> I believe the conflicts were only due to refactoring (variable names changed) and one adjacent documentation change
3242018-05-24T18:59:29  *** jcorgan has quit IRC
3252018-05-24T18:59:29  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3262018-05-24T18:59:41  <sipa> jimpo: let's discuss after meeting
3272018-05-24T19:00:06  <wumpus> #startmeeting
3282018-05-24T19:00:06  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu May 24 19:00:06 2018 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
3292018-05-24T19:00:06  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
3302018-05-24T19:00:07  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
3312018-05-24T19:00:12  *** Guest86254 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3322018-05-24T19:00:13  <promag> hi
3332018-05-24T19:00:31  <jimpo> hi
3342018-05-24T19:00:32  <murch1> hello
3352018-05-24T19:00:41  <jcorgan> lurking
3362018-05-24T19:00:49  <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
3372018-05-24T19:00:57  <achow101> hi
3382018-05-24T19:01:01  <jonasschnelli> hi
3392018-05-24T19:01:32  <wumpus> I guess the topic of priority today is 0.16.1
3402018-05-24T19:01:36  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3412018-05-24T19:01:44  <jamesob> hi
3422018-05-24T19:01:50  <jnewbery> hello
3432018-05-24T19:01:56  <wumpus> #topic 0.16.1
3442018-05-24T19:02:03  <wumpus> there's a few backports left to do
3452018-05-24T19:02:31  <wumpus> or does #13317 include all of them?
3462018-05-24T19:02:31  <cfields> hi
3472018-05-24T19:02:32  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13317 | [0.16.1] Remainig backports by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #13317 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3482018-05-24T19:02:41  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: I left out the qt one
3492018-05-24T19:02:53  <MarcoFalke> I think it changes translations. I might do it in a separate pull
3502018-05-24T19:03:04  <wumpus> I'll add that one to "high priority for review" at least
3512018-05-24T19:03:07  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: ok, thanks!
3522018-05-24T19:03:45  <wumpus> so please all review that PR ^^
3532018-05-24T19:04:25  <wumpus> especially the non-trivial backports
3542018-05-24T19:04:42  <MarcoFalke> With regard to the other high priority prs in the project: I think we can remove the one from BlueMatt for now
3552018-05-24T19:04:51  <jtimon> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12172 is a small thing, but it is a bugfix, perhaps it makes sense to backport it?
3562018-05-24T19:04:52  <MarcoFalke> And add next week when the rebase is done
3572018-05-24T19:05:09  <sipa> #12172
3582018-05-24T19:05:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12172 | Bugfix: RPC: savemempool: Dont save until LoadMempool() is finished by jtimon · Pull Request #12172 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3592018-05-24T19:05:34  <wumpus> I think we should focus on 0.16.1 now, we'll get around to the other high priority stuff again next week
3602018-05-24T19:05:36  <MarcoFalke> jtimon: that lead to a ton of issues in our tests
3612018-05-24T19:05:46  <MarcoFalke> I'd prefer we didn't backport that one
3622018-05-24T19:06:10  <wumpus> I don't think it's terribly urgent to backport, maybe for 0.16.2
3632018-05-24T19:06:13  <jamesob> is #12431 worth a backport?
3642018-05-24T19:06:15  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12431 | Only call NotifyBlockTip when chainActive changes by jamesob · Pull Request #12431 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3652018-05-24T19:06:26  <MarcoFalke> jamesob: What bug does it fix?
3662018-05-24T19:07:00  <jamesob> potentially incorrect behavior in waitforblockheight (and anything else relying on rpc/blockchain.cpp:latestblock)
3672018-05-24T19:07:02  <jtimon> MarcoFalke: ok, no hurry, good to know someone tried it, now I'm curious about the issues in the tests and I'll play with travis and the backport
3682018-05-24T19:07:20  <MarcoFalke> jamesob: waitforblockheight is a hidden tests-only rpc
3692018-05-24T19:07:23  <wumpus> potentially how bad?
3702018-05-24T19:07:25  <wumpus> oh
3712018-05-24T19:08:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
3722018-05-24T19:08:22  <jnewbery> jtimon: #12863
3732018-05-24T19:08:23  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12863 | mempool_persist.py failing in travis · Issue #12863 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3742018-05-24T19:08:59  <jtimon> jnewbery: thanks
3752018-05-24T19:09:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3762018-05-24T19:09:42  <wumpus> other topics?
3772018-05-24T19:10:37  <sipa> i want to bring up #13298 briefly
3782018-05-24T19:10:39  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13298 | Net: Random delays *per network group* to obfuscate transaction time by naumenkogs · Pull Request #13298 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3792018-05-24T19:10:39  <wumpus> anything else important for 0.16.1 that still needs to be done?
3802018-05-24T19:10:49  <sipa> (not for 0.16.1, to be clear)
3812018-05-24T19:11:04  <wumpus> (no problem, that was an orthogonal question)
3822018-05-24T19:11:08  <wumpus> #topic Random delays *per network group* to obfuscate transaction time
3832018-05-24T19:11:45  <sipa> i want to bring it up because it's a possibly significant effect on P2P transaction relay
3842018-05-24T19:11:59  <sipa> and it needs review beyond "does the code work"
3852018-05-24T19:12:02  <wumpus> I haven't had chance to look at it yet
3862018-05-24T19:12:17  <sipa> but it's also just local policy and not something that warrants a BIP imho
3872018-05-24T19:12:18  *** Oldnewbie has quit IRC
3882018-05-24T19:12:37  <wumpus> agree
3892018-05-24T19:12:55  <sipa> maybe there's not much more to say about that, just hoping to get people to think about it a bit
3902018-05-24T19:13:33  <wumpus> #action look at PR 13298
3912018-05-24T19:13:54  <wumpus> it's three days old, so people are excused not having an opinion on it yet :-)
3922018-05-24T19:14:09  <sipa> end topic :)
3932018-05-24T19:14:15  <cfields> thanks for bringing it up, I'll have a look as well...
3942018-05-24T19:14:23  <wumpus> other topics?
3952018-05-24T19:14:23  <cfields> it'd be nice to have a tool to model that kind of change, though.
3962018-05-24T19:14:47  <provoostenator> Topic suggestion: GUI prune setting
3972018-05-24T19:15:23  <wumpus> cfields: makes sense, maybe propose it in the PR
3982018-05-24T19:15:36  <wumpus> #topic GUI prune setting (provoostenator)
3992018-05-24T19:15:38  <provoostenator> AKA #13043
4002018-05-24T19:15:41  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13043 | [qt] OptionsDialog: add prune setting by Sjors · Pull Request #13043 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4012018-05-24T19:16:23  <jonasschnelli> Looks good,.. maybe orthogonal, but the prune settings should be in the intro...
4022018-05-24T19:16:26  <provoostenator> There's some confusion around whether using QT settings is appropriate for this, and I see three ways out.
4032018-05-24T19:16:29  <jonasschnelli> That's where it is probably most valuable
4042018-05-24T19:16:59  <provoostenator> 1. ignore the problem
4052018-05-24T19:17:02  <wumpus> I'm ok with most solutions, except writing to bitcoin.conf
4062018-05-24T19:17:12  <provoostenator> 2. go the writable config file route
4072018-05-24T19:17:13  <jonasschnelli> what wumpus sais
4082018-05-24T19:17:14  <kanzure> hi.
4092018-05-24T19:17:28  <provoostenator> 3. interpret a lack of prune= setting differently
4102018-05-24T19:18:15  <jonasschnelli> Can't the GUI settings not just override what is already set?
4112018-05-24T19:18:16  <instagibbs> (3) is interesting
4122018-05-24T19:18:33  <achow101> there currently are a few settings that are saved to qt settings that are shared between qt and bitcoind
4132018-05-24T19:18:40  <achow101> but bitcoind can't access
4142018-05-24T19:18:45  <provoostenator> If we go for (2) then I'd like to nominate #11082 for priority review
4152018-05-24T19:18:46  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11082 | Add new bitcoin_rw.conf file that is used for settings modified by this software itself by luke-jr · Pull Request #11082 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4162018-05-24T19:18:56  <jonasschnelli> If prune is set via confi/startip, disallow access in the GUI settings (only display it)
4172018-05-24T19:18:57  <achow101> so if we follow what has been done previously, then we ignore it
4182018-05-24T19:19:01  <wumpus> yes an additional writable config file would be fine
4192018-05-24T19:19:31  <jonasschnelli> Do we want four(!) levels of configuration?
4202018-05-24T19:19:35  <jimpo> What about augmenting the GUI to help you generate a default config file when none already exists?
4212018-05-24T19:19:37  <jonasschnelli> And eventually importing conf-files?
4222018-05-24T19:19:40  <wumpus> there have also been plans to add RPCs to change configuration settings, that'd require a similar thing, just don't write the -conf file it's just as likely to be in an read-only directory
4232018-05-24T19:20:23  <jonasschnelli> Would the rw_conf file be replacing the QSettings layer?
4242018-05-24T19:20:31  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: probably
4252018-05-24T19:20:31  <provoostenator> Right, I'd also like to get rid of QT settings completely and use a read-write (seperate) config file.
4262018-05-24T19:20:38  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: long term, at least
4272018-05-24T19:20:39  <jonasschnelli> That would be acceptable
4282018-05-24T19:20:58  <provoostenator> I wrote a migration away from QTSettings here: #12833
4292018-05-24T19:21:01  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12833 | [qt] move QSettings to bitcoin.conf where possible by Sjors · Pull Request #12833 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4302018-05-24T19:21:08  <jonasschnelli> But please not conf<->startup-cli-params<->QTSettings<->level4_rw_conf
4312018-05-24T19:21:14  <wumpus> nice
4322018-05-24T19:21:34  <jonasschnelli> Thanks provoostenator for working on that!
4332018-05-24T19:21:36  <achow101> since this is a problem that effects multiple options, can we just ignore the problem for now and deal with them all together at the same time with a better solution?
4342018-05-24T19:21:40  <wumpus> yes storing some of the settings in a different place has been problematic
4352018-05-24T19:21:54  <wumpus> (at least in the QSettings - because bitcoind can't get there)
4362018-05-24T19:22:00  <instagibbs> users could by and large be migrated over the rw unless they have a need for read-only
4372018-05-24T19:22:09  <instagibbs> for simplicity
4382018-05-24T19:22:09  <wumpus> the only thing that would idally be stored in the QSettings would be the data directory
4392018-05-24T19:22:22  <wumpus> well the bitcoin.conf is for human editing
4402018-05-24T19:22:28  <provoostenator> This migration would also work if it's done _after_ we add prune stuff to QTSettings.
4412018-05-24T19:22:35  <wumpus> the _rw is machine writable, all comments will be discarded etc
4422018-05-24T19:22:41  <instagibbs> ah hm
4432018-05-24T19:22:45  <jonasschnelli> yes
4442018-05-24T19:22:48  <provoostenator> But if we can get the proper solution over with, that might be better.
4452018-05-24T19:23:34  <jonasschnelli> For 12833 I'm also unsure about the term "Limit".
4462018-05-24T19:23:35  <wumpus> on the other hand, having things be dependent on each other is usually a bad idea, just draws out things
4472018-05-24T19:23:36  <jonasschnelli> Since this is not true
4482018-05-24T19:24:25  <provoostenator> jonasschnelli: what "Limit"?
4492018-05-24T19:24:40  *** rodarmor has quit IRC
4502018-05-24T19:25:09  <jonasschnelli> provoostenator: 12833 currently tells user "Limit block storage to: " which is not true... though the tooptip hints towards the right handling.
4512018-05-24T19:25:19  *** rodarmor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4522018-05-24T19:25:28  <wumpus> how is it not true?
4532018-05-24T19:25:47  <provoostenator> That's #13043
4542018-05-24T19:25:49  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13043 | [qt] OptionsDialog: add prune setting by Sjors · Pull Request #13043 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4552018-05-24T19:26:13  <provoostenator> Which I fixed, but screenshot is outdated.
4562018-05-24T19:26:28  <provoostenator> It's now "Prune &amp;block storage to"
4572018-05-24T19:26:41  *** clarkmoody has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4582018-05-24T19:26:45  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: AFAIK the 550MB assumption (if one sets 550) is still on 1MB blocks
4592018-05-24T19:26:56  <jonasschnelli> But 288min blocks & undos are enforced
4602018-05-24T19:27:20  *** Squidicc has quit IRC
4612018-05-24T19:27:31  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: right, that's an issue for the command line help too though, I think?
4622018-05-24T19:27:35  *** Squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4632018-05-24T19:27:36  <jonasschnelli> but maybe we should fix that (if it turns out to be a problem) rathern then changing the word "limit" :)
4642018-05-24T19:27:42  <provoostenator> I'm not too worried about details of the text and minimum size. It's what we need to do about saving settings that seems to cause things to get stuck.
4652018-05-24T19:27:49  <jonasschnelli> Indeed
4662018-05-24T19:28:35  <wumpus> other topics?
4672018-05-24T19:28:41  <jonasschnelli> I also hoped we could educate the user withing the GUI a bit more about pruning... but can be done later via extending the intro.cpp
4682018-05-24T19:28:41  *** promag has quit IRC
4692018-05-24T19:29:27  <wumpus> right, let's focus on getting the functionality in first. I think educating the user is a good thing, but having the PR depend on all those things being worked out is going to put it way past 0.17 probably.
4702018-05-24T19:29:54  <jonasschnelli> I have a short topic: sipa raised concerns about the scantxoutset RPC command
4712018-05-24T19:30:10  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4722018-05-24T19:30:12  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
4732018-05-24T19:30:24  <jonasschnelli> (if that is something we want to discuss here)
4742018-05-24T19:30:45  <wumpus> so the feature freeze for 0.17 is 2018-07-16, less than two months away
4752018-05-24T19:31:02  <provoostenator> Also note that I don't think Mac shows the intro dialog.
4762018-05-24T19:31:08  <wumpus> #topic scantxoutset RPC command (jonasschnelli)
4772018-05-24T19:31:14  <jonasschnelli> provoostenator: it does at least for me
4782018-05-24T19:31:18  <wumpus> provoostenator: it should!
4792018-05-24T19:31:24  <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12196#pullrequestreview-121570579
4802018-05-24T19:31:40  <provoostenator> jonasschnelli: ok, maybe I need to delete more stuff for it to appear.
4812018-05-24T19:31:56  <jonasschnelli> Before continuing on #12196 we may want to discuss it it makes sense to have a scantxoutset command
4822018-05-24T19:31:59  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12196 | Add scantxoutset RPC method by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #12196 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4832018-05-24T19:32:03  <wumpus> you need to delete -whereever it stores the qsettings on Mac-
4842018-05-24T19:32:31  <wumpus> on UNIX you can pass the flag -resetguisettings but that's not easy on Mac I think
4852018-05-24T19:32:42  <jonasschnelli> (works on mac as well)
4862018-05-24T19:33:00  <wumpus> good :)
4872018-05-24T19:33:22  <provoostenator> Resetting gui settings didn't do it for me, but will debug some other time.
4882018-05-24T19:33:24  <achow101> jonasschnelli: what is the command supposed to do?
4892018-05-24T19:33:26  <jonasschnelli> The scan functionality allows utxo sweeping (rawsweeptransaction) with no block scanning
4902018-05-24T19:33:49  <jonasschnelli> You can pass in n pubkeys/addresses or even xpubs with a lookup window and it gives you back all unspents
4912018-05-24T19:33:56  <sipa> yeah i just mentioned that we preferably don't commit to having functionality that's hard to maintain in the future
4922018-05-24T19:33:58  <jonasschnelli> And eben a rawsweeptransaction to a single address
4932018-05-24T19:33:58  *** gribble is now known as Guest11419
4942018-05-24T19:33:58  *** Lauda is now known as Guest17490
4952018-05-24T19:33:58  *** Anduck is now known as Guest73176
4962018-05-24T19:33:58  *** kakobrekla is now known as Guest5055
4972018-05-24T19:33:59  *** gmaxwell is now known as Guest6002
4982018-05-24T19:33:59  *** hirish is now known as Guest76309
4992018-05-24T19:34:00  *** wbnns is now known as Guest77272
5002018-05-24T19:34:00  *** Guest11419 has quit IRC
5012018-05-24T19:34:00  *** Apocalyptic is now known as Guest87230
5022018-05-24T19:34:00  *** nanotube is now known as Guest12203
5032018-05-24T19:34:02  *** Guest6002 has quit IRC
5042018-05-24T19:34:02  *** xHire is now known as Guest94281
5052018-05-24T19:34:02  *** berndj is now known as Guest59143
5062018-05-24T19:34:02  *** petertodd is now known as Guest7568
5072018-05-24T19:34:02  *** helo is now known as Guest59519
5082018-05-24T19:34:05  *** mr_burdell is now known as Guest4727
5092018-05-24T19:34:05  *** pigeons is now known as Guest69601
5102018-05-24T19:34:06  *** da2ce7 is now known as Guest7379
5112018-05-24T19:34:06  *** GAit is now known as Guest56711
5122018-05-24T19:34:06  *** eenoch is now known as Guest47913
5132018-05-24T19:34:07  *** Bosma is now known as Guest20188
5142018-05-24T19:34:07  *** phantomcircuit is now known as Guest11421
5152018-05-24T19:34:07  *** sturles is now known as Guest76759
5162018-05-24T19:34:08  *** BlueMatt is now known as Guest11337
5172018-05-24T19:34:08  *** Guest59143 has quit IRC
5182018-05-24T19:34:17  <sipa> fun.
5192018-05-24T19:34:18  <instagibbs> err what
5202018-05-24T19:34:21  <wumpus> services massacre
5212018-05-24T19:34:23  <cfields> irc unicorns...
5222018-05-24T19:34:25  *** gmaxwell_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5232018-05-24T19:34:46  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5242018-05-24T19:34:55  <cfields> let's move to slack!
5252018-05-24T19:34:59  <cfields> (/s)
5262018-05-24T19:35:06  <wumpus> :-(
5272018-05-24T19:35:06  * jonasschnelli stabs cfields
5282018-05-24T19:36:06  *** Varunram has quit IRC
5292018-05-24T19:36:06  *** Varunram has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5302018-05-24T19:36:06  *** Varunram has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5312018-05-24T19:36:17  *** Guest11337 is now known as BlueMatt
5322018-05-24T19:36:27  <sipa> back to topic?
5332018-05-24T19:36:29  <sipa> yeah i just mentioned that we preferably don't commit to having functionality that's hard to maintain in the future
5342018-05-24T19:36:30  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I think sipa's point is a valid point. Do we want to maintain something that may be incompatible with future utxo handling (or new model=
5352018-05-24T19:36:32  <provoostenator> Such functionality seems quite useful for watch-only stuff
5362018-05-24T19:36:42  <provoostenator> Without actually having to import things into a wallet.
5372018-05-24T19:36:53  <sipa> which isn't a problem if it were implemented on top of an optional index
5382018-05-24T19:36:57  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
5392018-05-24T19:37:36  <jimpo> sipa: is the optional index a full scriptPubKey index?
5402018-05-24T19:37:42  *** PrivKin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5412018-05-24T19:37:52  <provoostenator> But without caching of some sort (or an index?) I'm guessing it'd be very slow.
5422018-05-24T19:37:55  *** lifeofguenter has quit IRC
5432018-05-24T19:37:57  <jimpo> or something less than that?
5442018-05-24T19:38:10  <jonasschnelli> sipa: what if we allow it for now an mention in the RN it may later require an optional index?
5452018-05-24T19:38:41  <sipa> yes, perhaps
5462018-05-24T19:38:44  <jonasschnelli> provoostenator: 30seconds for the whole index with an xpub & 1000 keys lookup window on a SSD/fastCPU machine
5472018-05-24T19:38:51  <jimpo> Or just have an explicit flag enabling the RPC now, even if it requires no additional index at present?
5482018-05-24T19:38:54  <jonasschnelli> *whole set
5492018-05-24T19:39:00  *** lifeofguenter has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5502018-05-24T19:39:00  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5512018-05-24T19:39:03  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5522018-05-24T19:39:15  <sipa> yeah, that seems fine
5532018-05-24T19:39:27  *** bitconner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5542018-05-24T19:39:30  *** berndj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5552018-05-24T19:39:30  <sipa> i do see the usefulness of scanning the UTXO set
5562018-05-24T19:39:38  <provoostenator> All the way back to the genesis block?
5572018-05-24T19:39:48  <jonasschnelli> jimpo: yes. But feels a bit after artificially holding back functions due to possible future work (which may never happen)
5582018-05-24T19:39:51  <sipa> provoostenator: it scans the UTXO set, not the blockchain
5592018-05-24T19:39:53  <wumpus> yes, scanning the utxo set would be incredibly useful
5602018-05-24T19:40:03  <wumpus> I've wanted this functionality since forever really
5612018-05-24T19:40:18  <provoostenator> Ah OK, it just gets unspends, not transaction history. Well that's still quite useful indeed.
5622018-05-24T19:40:27  <jonasschnelli> I wanted that in master before the fork-coins happend. :)
5632018-05-24T19:40:54  <wumpus> even if slow it's so much faster than scanning the entire chain
5642018-05-24T19:41:01  <wumpus> (without index)
5652018-05-24T19:41:07  <jonasschnelli> it would also allow importing wallets (no rescan required) if one don't care about the tx history
5662018-05-24T19:41:39  <wumpus> using importprunedfunds I guess?
5672018-05-24T19:42:06  <jonasschnelli> Yes..
5682018-05-24T19:42:56  *** Krellan has quit IRC
5692018-05-24T19:43:02  <jonasschnelli> conclusion? Hide behind an artificial block-setting or risk it will not maintainable over time?
5702018-05-24T19:43:25  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5712018-05-24T19:43:48  <jimpo> I think it's probably fine to risk it not being maintainable over time without an explicit index
5722018-05-24T19:44:19  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I would feel okay with that...
5732018-05-24T19:44:45  <jonasschnelli> Let me mention that risk in the RN and fix the PR in general /topic
5742018-05-24T19:44:50  <wumpus> so it will just become slower due to the linear scan?
5752018-05-24T19:44:53  <provoostenator> By "not being maintainable over time" do you mean if the UTXO set gets really large or is it a code maintenance things?
5762018-05-24T19:45:06  <jonasschnelli> from sipa:
5772018-05-24T19:45:07  <jonasschnelli> Overall, I'm unsure about this. This is functionality that is more easily provided by software that maintains a UTXO index by script, and is not possible in general if we'd move to a design like UHF (see mailinglist) or other UTXO avoidance techniques. Those are far away of course, and features like this can be made optional (like txindex is) if needed. I'm just generally unconvinced a full node is the best place to put
5782018-05-24T19:45:07  <jonasschnelli>  this.
5792018-05-24T19:45:10  <wumpus> or is this 'unmaintainable' as in 'will give wumpus more headaches'?
5802018-05-24T19:45:22  <jonasschnelli> no.. changes of the general model
5812018-05-24T19:45:28  *** PrivKin has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5822018-05-24T19:45:39  <sipa> wumpus: in a UHF model, without indexes, implementing a scan of the UTXO set requires going through the blockchain
5832018-05-24T19:45:57  *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5842018-05-24T19:46:03  <sipa> (where we store hashes of UTXOs rather than the UTXOs themselves)
5852018-05-24T19:46:08  <instagibbs> sipa, searchable index has been tried a few times, and sadly dropped, something like 3 times
5862018-05-24T19:46:12  <wumpus> sipa: so that's a far future thing right?
5872018-05-24T19:46:13  *** PrivKin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5882018-05-24T19:46:15  <instagibbs> not saying it's not the right way
5892018-05-24T19:46:28  <sipa> instagibbs: yes, my preference is that's implemented in other software
5902018-05-24T19:46:51  <jcorgan> i bet there's a dozen private implementations of tx/addr external indexing for xpub related things
5912018-05-24T19:47:10  <wumpus> I'd really like a way to scan UTXOs, my own appraoch was to stream the UTXO set over HTTP and do it client-side, but that ran into problems with the libevent http server :(
5922018-05-24T19:47:26  <jonasschnelli> Yes. But there is no fast access to the UTXO set from outside of our code-base IMO
5932018-05-24T19:47:36  <jcorgan> i do it with zmq notifications and the REST interface
5942018-05-24T19:47:46  * jonasschnelli curses zmq
5952018-05-24T19:47:56  <jcorgan> you're welcome :-)
5962018-05-24T19:47:57  * wumpus still wants to resurrect #7759 some day
5972018-05-24T19:48:00  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7759 | [WIP] rest: Stream entire utxo set by laanwj · Pull Request #7759 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5982018-05-24T19:48:18  <achow101> I've taken to modifying gettxoutsetinfo whenever I need to scan the utxo set. takes like 20 minutes though to scan the whole thing
5992018-05-24T19:48:21  <jonasschnelli> interesting... almost forgotten
6002018-05-24T19:48:28  <provoostenator> In this future where "we store hashes of UTXOs rather than the UTXOs themselves", wouldn't there simply be an optional "index" with the UTXO, which this RPC method could then move to?
6012018-05-24T19:48:43  <jonasschnelli> achow101: only if you are in debug mode? right... takes 30secs here
6022018-05-24T19:48:45  <wumpus> provoostenator: yes... exactly... I say it's a problem/option for then
6032018-05-24T19:48:58  *** Guest94281 is now known as SunbeamMajesty
6042018-05-24T19:49:12  <provoostenator> We'd have to make it clear that in the future the method would / might require an index.
6052018-05-24T19:49:26  <achow101> jonasschnelli: I think it was the operations I was doing, or my slow hdd
6062018-05-24T19:49:28  <wumpus> achow101: on ARM it's pretty slow (but still faster than scanning the whole chain!)
6072018-05-24T19:49:28  <sipa> it's the same issue as we had with txindex
6082018-05-24T19:49:41  <sipa> people build solution that assume txindex is always there... then we moved to a UTXO model
6092018-05-24T19:50:08  <sipa> and txindex became an inefficient optional thing
6102018-05-24T19:50:08  <wumpus> we can even deprecate the RPC then
6112018-05-24T19:50:14  <achow101> sipa: then it will be the same situation as getrawtransaction
6122018-05-24T19:50:49  <jimpo> with #13243, it should become less costly to build future indexes in the background...
6132018-05-24T19:50:50  <wumpus> I don't think we should reject useful, optional, functionality just because of some future data structure change
6142018-05-24T19:50:51  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13243 | Make reusable base class for auxiliary indices by jimpo · Pull Request #13243 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6152018-05-24T19:50:52  <sipa> achow101: my concern is not the incompatibility
6162018-05-24T19:51:07  <sipa> achow101: my concern is people building an ecosystem that assumes it's always possible and cheap to do
6172018-05-24T19:51:43  <sipa> but okay, i agree with the points here
6182018-05-24T19:52:07  <wumpus> sipa: I agree with that in general, but I'm not sure here
6192018-05-24T19:52:12  <jonasschnelli> jimpo: great work!
6202018-05-24T19:52:17  <provoostenator> The fact that it takes 30 seconds is helpful in that case. :-)
6212018-05-24T19:52:17  <jcorgan> if we want to encourage people to treat bitcoind as the "ground truth", instead of baking up their own stuff, giving them easier access to the "database" would help
6222018-05-24T19:52:49  <sipa> jcorgan: yes... except that the ground truth in the future may not be the UTXO set
6232018-05-24T19:53:06  <provoostenator> jcorgan: that too, would be nice to be able to get easy to export dumps of useful things, though not should what format.
6242018-05-24T19:53:08  <jcorgan> sure, but anything can happen in the future
6252018-05-24T19:53:17  <wumpus> sure, but anything can happen in the future <- that
6262018-05-24T19:53:21  <jonasschnelli> jimpo: the question is, if we not want to build a base for an external indexing daemon (outside of the Core project)
6272018-05-24T19:53:36  *** tryphe_000 has quit IRC
6282018-05-24T19:53:45  <wumpus> in any case this is hard to do out-of-process right now!
6292018-05-24T19:53:48  <wumpus> even harder than indexing
6302018-05-24T19:53:52  <jcorgan> i'd be happy with that, too, instead of making everyone else recreate it
6312018-05-24T19:54:05  *** tryphe_000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6322018-05-24T19:54:05  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: Indeed
6332018-05-24T19:54:10  <sipa> it's also less a concern to add optional indexes now with jimpo's background index work
6342018-05-24T19:54:24  <sipa> before, new indexes always required ugly hacks all over the validation code
6352018-05-24T19:54:30  <wumpus> nice!
6362018-05-24T19:54:32  <jimpo> My guess is there will be ongoing tension between adding RPC functionality and keeping the node requirements small unless there are more options for users
6372018-05-24T19:54:33  <jcorgan> yes
6382018-05-24T19:54:46  <echeveria> it's a really bad idea to add an address index.
6392018-05-24T19:54:47  <provoostenator> Not too mention that you couldn't turn on/off txindex without reindexing everything.
6402018-05-24T19:54:52  <instagibbs> jimpo, an rpc call in every garage!
6412018-05-24T19:54:56  <jcorgan> i used to maintain the addrindex patch set and it got uglier and uglier over time
6422018-05-24T19:54:58  <echeveria> it means people will willyfully build insane systems.
6432018-05-24T19:55:02  <jimpo> haha
6442018-05-24T19:55:05  <sipa> echeveria: yes :(
6452018-05-24T19:55:06  <jonasschnelli> echeveria: agree
6462018-05-24T19:55:12  <sipa> but i fear they'll do so anyway
6472018-05-24T19:55:15  <echeveria> rather than sane, scalable things that don't require an ever growing index.
6482018-05-24T19:55:41  <jimpo> I tend to agree a better solution is to have a separate indexing service that doesn't do consensus but maintains the full chain state
6492018-05-24T19:55:42  <jonasschnelli> The question is, is it faster to index everything or to have Core running with 10k wallets
6502018-05-24T19:55:54  <jcorgan> +1 jimpo
6512018-05-24T19:55:54  <jimpo> and gets blocks via zmq
6522018-05-24T19:55:59  <sipa> decent wallet software shouldn't ever need to scan
6532018-05-24T19:56:04  <sipa> except for recovery
6542018-05-24T19:56:09  <jcorgan> i want to let bitcoind do the hard stuff (validation)
6552018-05-24T19:56:27  <jcorgan> but then i want to easily get at all the validated data
6562018-05-24T19:56:34  *** MrPaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6572018-05-24T19:56:38  <wumpus> maybe it never *needs* to, but there are legit situations in which it's useful as a tool
6582018-05-24T19:56:43  <sipa> sure!
6592018-05-24T19:58:10  <jonasschnelli> jimpo: fork Core, ripout the validation stuff and you have an indexing daemon you can connect to your core node over p2p
6602018-05-24T19:58:25  *** SunbeamMajesty is now known as xHire
6612018-05-24T19:58:31  <sipa> having a way to disable validation would also help with that :)
6622018-05-24T19:58:40  <sipa> anyway, this is turning into a philosophical discussion
6632018-05-24T19:58:40  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: why not use your indexing daemon?
6642018-05-24T19:58:57  <wumpus> yes, I think we're through the meeting
6652018-05-24T19:59:06  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: maybe. Not sure if we want another p2p library introduced
6662018-05-24T19:59:09  *** tryphe_000 has quit IRC
6672018-05-24T19:59:21  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: not into bitcoin core, I mean as external thing
6682018-05-24T19:59:27  <wumpus> #endmeeting
6692018-05-24T19:59:27  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu May 24 19:59:27 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
6702018-05-24T19:59:27  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-24-19.00.html
6712018-05-24T19:59:27  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-24-19.00.txt
6722018-05-24T19:59:27  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-05-24-19.00.log.html
6732018-05-24T19:59:35  *** tryphe_000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6742018-05-24T19:59:39  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: yes. But even there we may want to reuse the primitives...
6752018-05-24T20:00:06  <jonasschnelli> or maybe its good to use another library to find things we would not find using the same core code
6762018-05-24T20:01:06  *** PrivKin has quit IRC
6772018-05-24T20:01:45  *** PrivKin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6782018-05-24T20:02:00  <jimpo> yeah, I think diversity at the P2P layer is healthy, using the same validation engine
6792018-05-24T20:02:11  <jimpo> and some can have features requiring additional indexes
6802018-05-24T20:02:46  <jimpo> speaking of which, what were you saying about the BIP 158 compression ratios, sipa?
6812018-05-24T20:03:08  <sipa> jimpo: sec
6822018-05-24T20:04:03  *** nmnkgl has quit IRC
6832018-05-24T20:04:30  <wumpus> jimpo: rust P2P layer? *ducks*
6842018-05-24T20:04:38  *** nmnkgl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6852018-05-24T20:04:39  <jimpo> of course
6862018-05-24T20:04:43  *** promag has quit IRC
6872018-05-24T20:04:44  <jimpo> :-)
6882018-05-24T20:06:07  <sipa> jimpo: so say you have a set of N elements
6892018-05-24T20:06:18  <sipa> (after deduplication)
6902018-05-24T20:06:34  *** nmnkgl has quit IRC
6912018-05-24T20:06:47  <sipa> this means you have a list of N entries, each in range 0..2^20*N-1, whose order does not matter
6922018-05-24T20:07:06  <sipa> the number of combinations for that is (2^20*N)^N / N!
6932018-05-24T20:07:39  <sipa> (approximately; this formula ignores that there may be duplicates among those N, but that chance is low)
6942018-05-24T20:08:18  *** PrivKin has quit IRC
6952018-05-24T20:08:33  *** Nadav_Kohen has quit IRC
6962018-05-24T20:08:36  <sipa> this means that information theoretically, you need at least log2((2^20*N)^N / N!) bits in total
6972018-05-24T20:08:47  <sipa> otherwise you couldn't express every combination
6982018-05-24T20:09:53  <sipa> for N=10000, that number is 214419 bits, or 21.4419 bits per element
6992018-05-24T20:10:35  <provoostenator> When I do "bitcoin-cli -config=/the/usual/place -datadir=/some/other/place getblockheight"  it creates a folder /some/other/place/wallets
7002018-05-24T20:10:54  <sipa> jimpo: a GCS implementation will use 21.5819 bits on average
7012018-05-24T20:11:05  <jimpo> oh, interesting
7022018-05-24T20:11:06  <provoostenator> Even if the RPC connection fails.
7032018-05-24T20:11:33  <jimpo> (damn it small graphs on Wolfram Alpha)
7042018-05-24T20:12:19  <sipa> jimpo: what i don't know is if there's isn't another probabilistic data structure that has a 1/2^P false postive rate which needs less information
7052018-05-24T20:12:42  <sipa> but at least any construction that follows from compressing a list of N elements in range 0...2^20*N will at least need 21.4419
7062018-05-24T20:13:29  <jimpo> thanks for the explanation
7072018-05-24T20:13:35  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7082018-05-24T20:14:16  <sipa> but this is *really* good
7092018-05-24T20:14:26  <jimpo> yeah, seems GCS is doing very well
7102018-05-24T20:14:37  <sipa> less than 1% overhead above the theoretical minimum
7112018-05-24T20:15:33  <jimpo> I've been thinking a bit about tuning the P value. Kind of unfortunate that it's static.
7122018-05-24T20:15:44  <sipa> even at just 100 elements, GCS has less than 1% overhead
7132018-05-24T20:17:10  *** Guest17490 is now known as Lauda
7142018-05-24T20:17:18  *** promag has quit IRC
7152018-05-24T20:18:21  <sipa> at a false positive rate of 1/2^10 it's close to 1.5% overhead
7162018-05-24T20:20:06  <sipa> gmaxwell and i were looking at whether a better custom entropy coder could do better than GCS, but then he pointed out to me that the limit isn't 20 bits per element, and that your numbers looked suspiciously close to the limit already
7172018-05-24T20:20:43  <jimpo> what is a custom entropy coder?
7182018-05-24T20:21:02  <sipa> not using golomb-rice coding but something custom that could get us closer to the theoretical limit
7192018-05-24T20:21:27  <sipa> it's certainly possible with a range coder
7202018-05-24T20:21:42  <sipa> though that would be complex and computationally expensive
7212018-05-24T20:22:28  <sipa> and now that it looks like golomb coding is so close to optimal already, it doesn't look worth looking into
7222018-05-24T20:22:37  <jimpo> out of curiosity, have you looked at PFOR/FastPFOR for integer sequence compression?
7232018-05-24T20:22:49  <sipa> i have never heard about those
7242018-05-24T20:22:50  <jimpo> I was experimenting with it yesterday for compression header values
7252018-05-24T20:23:01  <jimpo> and it gets pretty amazing results
7262018-05-24T20:25:34  <jimpo> if you take all off the versions in a 3,000 header range in a sequence, and do the same for timestamps, bits, and nonces, it compresses all of them together by ~90%
7272018-05-24T20:25:36  *** Guest5055 is now known as kakobrekla
7282018-05-24T20:25:48  <jimpo> can even compress sequences of nonces 75% on average
7292018-05-24T20:27:50  <echeveria> that seems kind of unlikely.
7302018-05-24T20:29:10  <jimpo> yeah, that's what I thought. but I tried decompressing some of the ranges and it seems to work?
7312018-05-24T20:30:04  *** Guest86254 has quit IRC
7322018-05-24T20:31:40  *** Nadav_Kohen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7332018-05-24T20:35:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TronBlack opened pull request #13318: Remove legacy verification (master...Remove-legacy-verification) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13318
7342018-05-24T20:35:29  <echeveria> lol
7352018-05-24T20:35:58  <echeveria> what on earth happened there. 30 second old pull request with 2 month old comments.
7362018-05-24T20:36:17  <harding> echeveria: the comments are on the specific commits, not the PR itself.
7372018-05-24T20:36:37  <echeveria> ah, github presents that confusingly.
7382018-05-24T20:39:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TronBlack closed pull request #13318: Remove legacy verification (master...Remove-legacy-verification) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13318
7392018-05-24T20:41:50  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7402018-05-24T20:46:27  *** bitconner has quit IRC
7412018-05-24T20:48:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #13319: gui: Backport bech32 checkbox (0.16...Mf1805-016ForBackportGui) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13319
7422018-05-24T20:52:20  *** goofie has quit IRC
7432018-05-24T21:00:22  *** gmaxwell_ has quit IRC
7442018-05-24T21:00:23  *** gmaxwell_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7452018-05-24T21:00:29  *** gmaxwell_ is now known as gmaxwell
7462018-05-24T21:07:17  *** goofie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7472018-05-24T21:14:55  *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7482018-05-24T21:20:46  *** clarkmoody has quit IRC
7492018-05-24T21:23:46  *** Guest87230 is now known as Apocalyptic
7502018-05-24T21:24:43  *** Guest11421 has quit IRC
7512018-05-24T21:24:54  *** phantomcircuit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7522018-05-24T21:25:39  <phantomcircuit> i've got a reeeeally old wallet
7532018-05-24T21:25:55  <phantomcircuit> the result of getbalance doesn't match the sum of all amounts in listtransactions "*" 1000000
7542018-05-24T21:26:03  <phantomcircuit> seems like a bug
7552018-05-24T21:27:04  <sipa> any unconfirmed transactions/
7562018-05-24T21:28:28  <phantomcircuit> sipa, nope
7572018-05-24T21:28:34  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7582018-05-24T21:28:58  <phantomcircuit> possibly it's cause it's all the dust that someone was flooding a while ago?
7592018-05-24T21:29:10  *** Nadav_Kohen has quit IRC
7602018-05-24T21:30:24  <sipa> you're calling getbalance, not getbalance "", right/
7612018-05-24T21:31:48  <sipa> jimpo: it seems PFOR assumes integers are sorted?
7622018-05-24T21:32:25  *** bitconner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7632018-05-24T21:32:42  <sipa> oh, or just the benchmark
7642018-05-24T21:35:13  <phantomcircuit> sipa, im running git master so the accounts stuff has been removed
7652018-05-24T21:35:19  <phantomcircuit> and im using the multi wallet support
7662018-05-24T21:35:26  <phantomcircuit> i guess i need to test this on stable
7672018-05-24T21:36:17  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
7682018-05-24T21:37:09  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
7692018-05-24T21:41:14  <phantomcircuit> sipa, hmm listunspent matches getbalance of course
7702018-05-24T21:41:35  *** Randolf has quit IRC
7712018-05-24T21:43:25  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
7722018-05-24T21:51:00  <phantomcircuit> sipa, that wasn't it
7732018-05-24T21:51:49  *** cfields has quit IRC
7742018-05-24T21:52:04  *** cfields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7752018-05-24T21:52:41  <phantomcircuit> the sum of the amounts field in listtransactions nominally should match getbalance i believe
7762018-05-24T21:53:42  <gmaxwell> coinjoins fuxor that no?
7772018-05-24T21:55:26  <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, shouldn't i dont think
7782018-05-24T21:56:19  <gmaxwell> when you 'sum amounts' how are you handling fees?
7792018-05-24T21:56:54  <phantomcircuit> hmm maybe it's that let me check
7802018-05-24T21:58:43  <phantomcircuit> derp yeah that was it
7812018-05-24T21:58:52  <gmaxwell> Next customer!
7822018-05-24T21:59:11  <sipa> queue = rotl(queue, 1)
7832018-05-24T22:00:00  * echeveria sets mode +b phantomcircuit
7842018-05-24T22:02:47  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
7852018-05-24T22:03:01  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7862018-05-24T22:04:06  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7872018-05-24T22:07:35  *** LeMiner has quit IRC
7882018-05-24T22:12:12  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
7892018-05-24T22:12:19  *** Guest76759 is now known as sturles
7902018-05-24T22:12:49  *** sturles is now known as Guest25008
7912018-05-24T22:13:07  *** Guest25008 is now known as sturle
7922018-05-24T22:13:23  *** sturle is now known as sturles
7932018-05-24T22:38:10  *** grafcaps has quit IRC
7942018-05-24T22:38:36  *** tryphe_000 has quit IRC
7952018-05-24T22:39:00  *** tryphe_000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7962018-05-24T22:39:29  *** grafcaps has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7972018-05-24T22:42:51  *** _flow__ has quit IRC
7982018-05-24T22:44:50  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7992018-05-24T22:47:57  *** grafcaps has quit IRC
8002018-05-24T22:57:30  *** _flow__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8012018-05-24T23:02:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
8022018-05-24T23:03:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8032018-05-24T23:06:04  *** drexl has quit IRC
8042018-05-24T23:12:55  *** promag has quit IRC
8052018-05-24T23:19:51  *** jtimon has quit IRC
8062018-05-24T23:31:13  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
8072018-05-24T23:32:22  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8082018-05-24T23:33:29  *** grafcaps has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8092018-05-24T23:53:48  *** MisterPaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8102018-05-24T23:57:30  *** MrPaz has quit IRC