1 2019-04-25T00:00:01  *** UltimateNate has quit IRC
  2 2019-04-25T00:04:49  *** chaosagent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  3 2019-04-25T00:09:47  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2019-04-25T00:10:19  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  5 2019-04-25T00:12:31  *** rev_strangehope has quit IRC
  6 2019-04-25T00:14:42  *** shesek has quit IRC
  7 2019-04-25T00:15:47  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  8 2019-04-25T00:15:47  *** shesek has quit IRC
  9 2019-04-25T00:15:47  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2019-04-25T00:17:32  *** dviola has quit IRC
 11 2019-04-25T00:27:54  *** diego1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2019-04-25T00:30:07  *** diego1 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2019-04-25T00:30:44  *** dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2019-04-25T00:31:54  *** scoop has quit IRC
 15 2019-04-25T00:32:21  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2019-04-25T00:38:31  *** scoop has quit IRC
 17 2019-04-25T00:39:04  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
 18 2019-04-25T00:44:01  *** jeremyrubin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2019-04-25T00:45:25  *** promag_ has quit IRC
 20 2019-04-25T00:48:56  <jeremyrubin> Does anyone have any references on SIGHASH_NOINPUT + Schnorr and not enabling pubkey recovery? (I understand why it doesn't enable it, but I don't understand why we aren't adding a flag like SIGHASH_SIGNINGKEY). That or alternatives like OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK or OP_PUSHXDATA. Trying to get a general sense of the roadmap on these features and what's a solved problem or what's open design space still.
 21 2019-04-25T00:49:16  <jeremyrubin> sipa: ^
 22 2019-04-25T00:49:34  <jeremyrubin> jl2012: ^
 23 2019-04-25T00:50:25  <luke-jr> jeremyrubin: pubkey recovery is arguably an implementation detail
 24 2019-04-25T00:50:58  <sipa> pubkey recovery is not compatible with batch validation
 25 2019-04-25T00:51:33  <sipa> plus key/signature aggregation generally achieve the same bandwidth savings in a more generic fashion
 26 2019-04-25T00:51:52  <sipa> i'm not sure what sighash_signingkey would mean
 27 2019-04-25T00:51:54  <luke-jr> (aside from sipa's point) an implementation could already strip pubkeys from scripts and do recovery instead
 28 2019-04-25T00:51:57  <jeremyrubin> not interested in the bandwidth savings aspect
 29 2019-04-25T00:52:18  <jeremyrubin> More useful is the vault-like aspects
 30 2019-04-25T00:52:30  <jeremyrubin> (e.g., for very simple covenants)
 31 2019-04-25T00:52:59  <sipa> i don't see any problem with OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK
 32 2019-04-25T00:53:31  <gmaxwell> jeremyrubin: the recovery is signficantly slower to validate even ignoring the batch validation which it breaks. There is also a specific patent encumberance concern.
 33 2019-04-25T00:57:31  <sipa> as far as covenants go, if there is an actual desire for those, they should be supported in a first-class fashion (by having opcodes that make assertions on the spending tx), not only through a hacky pubkey recovery construction imho
 34 2019-04-25T00:57:31  <jeremyrubin> Ok, so if there were a feature which would be implementable as either a one-off feature, or via something that requires SIGHASH_NOINPUT & something which enables PubkeyRecovery (and excludes batching) that would be maybe an OK path?
 35 2019-04-25T00:58:01  <sipa> i don't see why you'd want that
 36 2019-04-25T00:58:16  <sipa> compared to alternative
 37 2019-04-25T00:58:27  <jeremyrubin> A one-off feature refers to what you said (first class feature)
 38 2019-04-25T01:00:00  <jeremyrubin> Do you have a sense or feeling about enabling somewhat generic covenant capabilities, or making an opcode that pretty tightly only enables one specific new feature?
 39 2019-04-25T01:00:00  <sipa> (to be clear: i'm giving my personal opinion on these things here, and not trying to predict what the developer ecosystem at large would think of such a hypothetical proposal; i can tell you i'm not personally interested in working on those things, though)
 40 2019-04-25T01:00:36  <jeremyrubin> That's fine, I'm just straw polling
 41 2019-04-25T01:00:52  <sipa> i suspect that to be a contentious question
 42 2019-04-25T01:01:23  <jeremyrubin> I would agree -- I think from a security perspective enabling the minimum new behavior is probably best
 43 2019-04-25T01:01:31  <jeremyrubin> but it feels similar to the MAST debacle
 44 2019-04-25T01:01:40  <gmaxwell> jeremyrubin: depends, like some generic thing that is inelegant is harder to justify than a specific thing, unless its really clear that the genericism is useful--- that it results in multiple interesting reasonably efficient things.
 45 2019-04-25T01:02:14  <sipa> jeremyrubin: generally my opinion is that for production usage, anything but the most efficient way of enabling a feature is not interesting
 46 2019-04-25T01:02:40  <gmaxwell> If the genericism is clean, doesn't result in difficult to analyize implications, and is clearly the compariable to the most efficient way to implement multiple interesting things, then that would be a case for it.
 47 2019-04-25T01:02:41  <jeremyrubin> Efficient is an interesting term...
 48 2019-04-25T01:02:53  <sipa> for experimentation purposes having generic opcodes that let you encode features at a low level are useful, but they're not really needed on mainnet to enable experimentation
 49 2019-04-25T01:04:17  <jeremyrubin> Gotcha.
 50 2019-04-25T01:04:22  <gmaxwell> sipa: a reasonable argument can be made that the highest efficiency isn't quite as important if the usage would be something like a taproot fallback case--  there more as a threat than anything else.
 51 2019-04-25T01:04:27  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I thought the patent expired?
 52 2019-04-25T01:04:42  <sipa> jeremyrubin: to be clear, that latter statement is very much my own opinion, and i suspect it is not a majority view
 53 2019-04-25T01:05:23  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: no, not for a long time. (it might not be a _valid_ patent for various reasons, it also might not be applicable to any particular implementation, but my prior analysis was that it was enough of a concern that I wouldn't want to use it without a very careful analysis)
 54 2019-04-25T01:05:36  <jeremyrubin> Are there any backreferences on something like OP_GETOUTPUTHASH (or OP_CHECKOUTPUTHASHVERIFY) which takes an index and queries an output in the txn?
 55 2019-04-25T01:06:00  <sipa> gmaxwell: yeah, though orders of magnitude matter... if we'd have bignum arithmetic available you'd still not want to implement SNARK verification in bitcoin script :)
 56 2019-04-25T01:06:07  <gmaxwell> sipa: I agree with that view with the 'threat cases can be less efficient' priviso.
 57 2019-04-25T01:06:15  <sipa> i agree my "most efificent" is an exaggeration
 58 2019-04-25T01:06:56  <gmaxwell> jeremyrubin: some of the challenge there is that you probably want to be able to carry a small amount of data forward in the output, rather than just fixing it exactly.
 59 2019-04-25T01:07:16  <jeremyrubin> Well, for a more generic solution, perhaps.
 60 2019-04-25T01:07:28  <sipa> jeremyrubin: i have thought very vaguely about having some sort of tree matching construction that you can apply against the spending tx
 61 2019-04-25T01:07:41  <jeremyrubin> But if theres a motivating use case which has no 'data hazard' it's useful
 62 2019-04-25T01:08:07  <jeremyrubin> sipa: I've been working on this for like 2 years a little bit ;)
 63 2019-04-25T01:08:39  <jeremyrubin> there are some pretty interesting use cases for something like this IMO
 64 2019-04-25T01:09:49  <sipa> i suspect there are indeed
 65 2019-04-25T01:09:53  <jeremyrubin> gmaxwell: the way to carry data forward if needed would be to have a script which has branches and you pre-commit to all possible data values
 66 2019-04-25T01:09:58  <sipa> though i haven't seen much concretely beyond vaults
 67 2019-04-25T01:10:00  <jeremyrubin> but that's a bit messy
 68 2019-04-25T01:10:38  <jeremyrubin> sipa: I'm happy to share some of my research in a more limited setting as I want to make sure my proposal is more polished before spreading such ideas
 69 2019-04-25T01:11:14  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 70 2019-04-25T01:11:20  <sipa> well i have no intention of working on these things myself... already buried in too many other work
 71 2019-04-25T01:11:32  <jeremyrubin> fair
 72 2019-04-25T01:11:47  <jeremyrubin> another possible implementation of this would be a segwit version which just commits to a set of outputs being created but has no scripting capabilities
 73 2019-04-25T01:13:29  <jeremyrubin> This sort of design ensures that there is *no* ability to branch on which UTXO gets created. This is good on the 'limited simplest implementation' front and easies to analyze, but I suspect people would want more.
 74 2019-04-25T01:14:16  <sipa> it would badly break fungbility if you need to announce in the output whether it falls under scripts or nonscript rules
 75 2019-04-25T01:15:50  *** scoop has quit IRC
 76 2019-04-25T01:16:00  <jeremyrubin> fungibility in terms of like a chain analysis tool?
 77 2019-04-25T01:16:01  <jeremyrubin> Ah -- I need to run to walk the dog before sundown, but will have a few other questions on this. Thanks for the input thus far!!
 78 2019-04-25T01:17:05  <sipa> jeremyrubin: i think it is generally advisable you can't distinguish different outputs tyoes (and to the extent possible, also when spending)
 79 2019-04-25T01:17:12  <sipa> that's the goal of taproot to a large extent
 80 2019-04-25T01:17:34  <sipa> avoiding revealing your policy to the world
 81 2019-04-25T01:22:54  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 82 2019-04-25T01:29:56  *** roconnor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 83 2019-04-25T01:31:47  <roconnor> #bitmetas
 84 2019-04-25T01:32:59  <roconnor> @jeremyrubin I had a chat with Bob McElrath about using SIGHASH_NOINPUT for a weak form of covenants.
 85 2019-04-25T01:36:30  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 86 2019-04-25T01:40:39  *** scoop has quit IRC
 87 2019-04-25T01:41:12  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 88 2019-04-25T01:45:43  *** scoop has quit IRC
 89 2019-04-25T01:45:53  *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
 90 2019-04-25T01:45:56  *** DougieBot5000_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 91 2019-04-25T02:01:48  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 92 2019-04-25T02:11:39  *** scoop has quit IRC
 93 2019-04-25T02:11:46  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 94 2019-04-25T02:16:51  *** spinza has quit IRC
 95 2019-04-25T02:17:49  *** DougieBot5000_ is now known as DougieBot5000
 96 2019-04-25T02:25:20  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2019-04-25T02:31:59  *** scoop has quit IRC
 98 2019-04-25T02:33:04  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 99 2019-04-25T02:46:05  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
100 2019-04-25T02:50:31  *** promag has quit IRC
101 2019-04-25T02:55:12  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
102 2019-04-25T03:00:01  *** chaosagent has quit IRC
103 2019-04-25T03:06:20  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
104 2019-04-25T03:10:26  *** scoop has quit IRC
105 2019-04-25T03:14:29  <luke-jr> why is feature_segwit testing that one can explicitly generate a legacy address, take its pubkey, turn it into segwit, and send to that?
106 2019-04-25T03:14:47  <luke-jr> I get that this works currently, but isn't that a behaviour we *don't* want?
107 2019-04-25T03:16:56  <sipa> luke-jr: wellit's testing currently implemented functionality - even if that functionality is undesirable, it is currently intentional
108 2019-04-25T03:17:41  <luke-jr> looking at the git history, it looks semi-accidental here at least
109 2019-04-25T03:17:55  <luke-jr> it used to addwitnessaddress explicitly, but that got removed
110 2019-04-25T03:20:00  <sipa> yeah, it's posaible the test can be rewritten in a way that matches expected workflows more
111 2019-04-25T03:37:22  *** kierra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112 2019-04-25T03:37:35  *** kierra is now known as Guest84953
113 2019-04-25T03:42:48  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2019-04-25T03:45:33  *** rev_strangehope has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
115 2019-04-25T03:46:10  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
116 2019-04-25T03:50:02  *** rev_strangehope has quit IRC
117 2019-04-25T04:09:25  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
118 2019-04-25T04:47:26  *** Guest84953 has quit IRC
119 2019-04-25T04:56:15  *** ppisati has quit IRC
120 2019-04-25T04:59:49  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
121 2019-04-25T05:02:54  *** ppisati has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2019-04-25T05:04:14  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
123 2019-04-25T05:04:53  *** Dean_Guss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
124 2019-04-25T05:04:54  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
125 2019-04-25T05:07:07  *** provoostenator has quit IRC
126 2019-04-25T05:08:29  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
127 2019-04-25T05:10:06  *** provoostenator has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
128 2019-04-25T05:10:54  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
129 2019-04-25T05:13:52  *** BlueMatt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
130 2019-04-25T05:17:23  *** gribble1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2019-04-25T05:17:37  *** davec has quit IRC
132 2019-04-25T05:19:30  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
133 2019-04-25T05:19:38  *** scoop has quit IRC
134 2019-04-25T05:32:55  *** qrest has quit IRC
135 2019-04-25T05:43:59  *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
136 2019-04-25T05:47:29  <luke-jr> hrm, trying to write an explicit test for implicit segwit stuff, and it's failing :/
137 2019-04-25T05:47:35  *** Dean_Guss has quit IRC
138 2019-04-25T05:57:22  *** ElePHPhant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
139 2019-04-25T06:00:01  *** gribble1 has quit IRC
140 2019-04-25T06:04:14  *** Phong_1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
141 2019-04-25T06:07:07  *** spaced0ut has quit IRC
142 2019-04-25T06:17:49  <luke-jr> is it supposed to ONLY be implicit after a restart?
143 2019-04-25T06:22:38  <sipa> no
144 2019-04-25T06:23:16  <sipa> luke-jr: what are you trying exactly?
145 2019-04-25T06:26:33  <luke-jr> sipa: I made a new address with getnewaddress, getaddressinfo to find the pubkey, convert that to each address type, send to them all, then make sure it shows a receive in listtransactions
146 2019-04-25T06:27:36  <luke-jr> after a restart, legacy => others seems to work
147 2019-04-25T06:31:39  <luke-jr> http://dpaste.com/2JEX4PS
148 2019-04-25T06:31:45  <luke-jr> weird, even w/o the restart the second check works
149 2019-04-25T06:34:07  <luke-jr> ugh, adding a sleep makes it work in the first loo
150 2019-04-25T06:34:55  <luke-jr> self.sync_all() is helpful >_<
151 2019-04-25T06:46:36  *** morcos has quit IRC
152 2019-04-25T06:48:31  *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2019-04-25T06:49:27  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
154 2019-04-25T07:01:02  *** sdaftuar has quit IRC
155 2019-04-25T07:01:29  *** sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
156 2019-04-25T07:24:37  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
157 2019-04-25T07:37:14  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
158 2019-04-25T07:41:22  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
159 2019-04-25T07:48:47  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
160 2019-04-25T07:48:48  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #15888: QA: Add wallet_implicitsegwit to test the ability to transform keys between address types (master...test_wallet_implicitsegwit) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15888
161 2019-04-25T07:48:51  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
162 2019-04-25T07:51:30  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
163 2019-04-25T08:04:33  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
164 2019-04-25T08:13:44  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
165 2019-04-25T08:16:14  *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
166 2019-04-25T08:24:07  *** profmac has quit IRC
167 2019-04-25T08:32:45  *** promag has quit IRC
168 2019-04-25T08:37:38  *** profmac has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
169 2019-04-25T08:42:08  *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
170 2019-04-25T09:00:02  *** Phong_1 has quit IRC
171 2019-04-25T09:04:16  *** rknLA1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172 2019-04-25T09:06:41  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
173 2019-04-25T09:40:39  *** sdaftuar has quit IRC
174 2019-04-25T09:41:01  *** sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2019-04-25T09:51:01  *** Soligor has quit IRC
176 2019-04-25T09:53:06  *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
177 2019-04-25T09:56:17  *** rev_strangehope has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
178 2019-04-25T10:01:28  *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
179 2019-04-25T10:02:55  *** rev_strangehope has quit IRC
180 2019-04-25T10:03:35  *** spinza has quit IRC
181 2019-04-25T10:04:06  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182 2019-04-25T10:07:04  *** shesek has quit IRC
183 2019-04-25T10:08:40  *** promag_ has quit IRC
184 2019-04-25T10:08:40  *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
185 2019-04-25T10:10:06  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
186 2019-04-25T10:11:50  *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
187 2019-04-25T10:30:03  *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
188 2019-04-25T10:32:38  *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
189 2019-04-25T11:05:22  *** ElePHPhant has left #bitcoin-core-dev
190 2019-04-25T11:11:04  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
191 2019-04-25T11:11:04  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192 2019-04-25T11:36:50  *** queip has quit IRC
193 2019-04-25T11:38:22  *** rafalcpp_ has quit IRC
194 2019-04-25T11:38:32  *** rafalcpp_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
195 2019-04-25T11:46:15  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2019-04-25T11:51:55  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
197 2019-04-25T12:00:02  *** rknLA1 has quit IRC
198 2019-04-25T12:04:16  *** reset has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
199 2019-04-25T12:24:18  *** owowo has quit IRC
200 2019-04-25T12:32:31  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2019-04-25T12:33:30  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202 2019-04-25T12:35:30  *** booyah has quit IRC
203 2019-04-25T12:36:41  *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
204 2019-04-25T12:36:54  *** scoop has quit IRC
205 2019-04-25T12:38:04  *** Cory has quit IRC
206 2019-04-25T12:42:00  *** queip has quit IRC
207 2019-04-25T12:42:22  *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
208 2019-04-25T12:42:30  *** rafalcpp_ has quit IRC
209 2019-04-25T12:43:10  *** Pasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
210 2019-04-25T12:45:13  *** shesek has quit IRC
211 2019-04-25T12:46:21  *** Pasha is now known as Cory
212 2019-04-25T12:47:25  *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
213 2019-04-25T12:47:46  *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
214 2019-04-25T12:50:55  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
215 2019-04-25T12:52:21  *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
216 2019-04-25T12:53:45  *** rev_strangehope has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
217 2019-04-25T12:54:54  *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
218 2019-04-25T12:57:57  *** rev_strangehope has quit IRC
219 2019-04-25T13:16:21  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
220 2019-04-25T13:16:22  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] harding opened pull request #15890: Doc: remove text about txes always relayed from -whitelist (master...2019-04-whitelist-help) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15890
221 2019-04-25T13:16:25  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
222 2019-04-25T13:24:57  *** spaced0ut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
223 2019-04-25T13:28:23  *** kokokoko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2019-04-25T13:35:23  *** kokokoko has quit IRC
225 2019-04-25T13:35:54  *** _Sam-- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2019-04-25T13:36:48  *** DougieBot5000_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
227 2019-04-25T13:39:53  *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
228 2019-04-25T13:42:43  *** ElePHPhant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
229 2019-04-25T13:53:40  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
230 2019-04-25T13:53:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #15891: test: Require standard txs in regtest (master...1904-testRequireStandard) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15891
231 2019-04-25T13:53:41  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
232 2019-04-25T14:05:58  *** reset has quit IRC
233 2019-04-25T14:13:19  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2019-04-25T14:15:22  *** queip has quit IRC
235 2019-04-25T14:16:10  *** rafalcpp_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
236 2019-04-25T14:16:47  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
237 2019-04-25T14:16:48  *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
238 2019-04-25T14:24:19  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
239 2019-04-25T14:24:28  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
240 2019-04-25T14:27:09  *** Kabaka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
241 2019-04-25T14:32:56  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242 2019-04-25T14:34:31  *** spinza has quit IRC
243 2019-04-25T14:40:03  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
244 2019-04-25T14:42:25  *** setpill has quit IRC
245 2019-04-25T14:53:48  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2019-04-25T15:00:02  *** Kabaka has quit IRC
247 2019-04-25T15:10:40  *** queip has quit IRC
248 2019-04-25T15:11:58  *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
249 2019-04-25T15:12:25  *** rafalcpp_ has quit IRC
250 2019-04-25T15:15:51  *** rev_strangehope has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
251 2019-04-25T15:16:16  *** KindOne1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252 2019-04-25T15:16:51  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
253 2019-04-25T15:21:52  *** rev_strangehope has quit IRC
254 2019-04-25T15:25:25  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
255 2019-04-25T15:25:25  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/40a720acb847...8cca1fbea9bc
256 2019-04-25T15:25:26  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 097c4aa Luke Dashjr: Bugfix: test/functional/rpc_psbt: Remove check for specific error message ...
257 2019-04-25T15:25:26  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c87fc71 Luke Dashjr: Bugfix: test/functional/rpc_psbt: Correct test description comment
258 2019-04-25T15:25:27  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8cca1fb MarcoFalke: Merge #14818: Bugfix: test/functional/rpc_psbt: Remove check for specific ...
259 2019-04-25T15:25:28  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
260 2019-04-25T15:25:51  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
261 2019-04-25T15:25:51  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #14818: Bugfix: test/functional/rpc_psbt: Remove check for specific error message that depends on uncertain assumptions (master...bugfix_test_rpc_psbt) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14818
262 2019-04-25T15:25:52  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
263 2019-04-25T15:26:43  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2019-04-25T15:33:52  <wumpus> moneyball: hey, no suggested topics for today's meeting yet in https://gist.github.com/moneyball/071d608fdae217c2a6d7c35955881d8a ?
265 2019-04-25T15:49:51  *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2019-04-25T15:53:43  *** cluelessperson has quit IRC
267 2019-04-25T16:23:43  *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
268 2019-04-25T16:38:43  *** scoop has quit IRC
269 2019-04-25T16:39:33  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
270 2019-04-25T16:43:31  *** scoop has quit IRC
271 2019-04-25T16:43:38  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272 2019-04-25T16:46:36  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
273 2019-04-25T16:52:28  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
274 2019-04-25T16:52:29  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
275 2019-04-25T17:06:36  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
276 2019-04-25T17:11:13  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
277 2019-04-25T17:18:05  <MarcoFalke> i don't think there have been any
278 2019-04-25T17:18:24  *** scoop has quit IRC
279 2019-04-25T17:18:32  <MarcoFalke> #proposedmeetingtopic 0.18.0-final early next week?
280 2019-04-25T17:29:14  <Sentineo> am not that good with git, but found a small thing that can was not working for me in the gitian build doc
281 2019-04-25T17:29:19  <Sentineo> git push --set-upstream $NAME $VERSION-not-codesigned
282 2019-04-25T17:29:22  *** jarthur has quit IRC
283 2019-04-25T17:29:24  <Sentineo> replacing $NAME with origin helps, just want to know if that is something to correct or my noobness
284 2019-04-25T17:29:28  <Sentineo> I want to add 'git add $VERSION*' before that, so will create a PR, but not sure about the --set-upstream one
285 2019-04-25T17:29:32  <Sentineo> Maybe that command is working for people who have the right to commit to the repo itself? I have to fork it and do the steps on mine and create a PR.
286 2019-04-25T17:29:48  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
287 2019-04-25T17:32:28  *** DougieBot5000_ is now known as DougieBot5000
288 2019-04-25T17:33:12  <MarcoFalke> Yeah, the guide assumes that your gpg key name is the same as you github handle
289 2019-04-25T17:33:13  <MarcoFalke>  git remote add $NAME git@github.com:$NAME/gitian.sigs.git
290 2019-04-25T17:34:10  *** jarthur has quit IRC
291 2019-04-25T17:36:47  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292 2019-04-25T17:39:56  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
293 2019-04-25T17:41:10  *** scoop has quit IRC
294 2019-04-25T17:41:38  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
295 2019-04-25T17:44:04  *** jaybny has quit IRC
296 2019-04-25T17:45:52  *** scoop has quit IRC
297 2019-04-25T17:45:59  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
298 2019-04-25T17:48:11  *** scoop has quit IRC
299 2019-04-25T17:48:37  <moneyball> wumpus: only the topic MarcoFalke just proposed
300 2019-04-25T17:48:47  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
301 2019-04-25T17:49:06  *** scoop has quit IRC
302 2019-04-25T17:49:33  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
303 2019-04-25T17:53:34  *** Kvaciral has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
304 2019-04-25T17:54:02  *** scoop has quit IRC
305 2019-04-25T17:56:13  *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
306 2019-04-25T17:59:03  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
307 2019-04-25T17:59:40  *** scoop has quit IRC
308 2019-04-25T18:00:02  *** KindOne1 has quit IRC
309 2019-04-25T18:00:08  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
310 2019-04-25T18:00:50  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
311 2019-04-25T18:04:23  *** scoop has quit IRC
312 2019-04-25T18:15:14  <dongcarl> Question: if we're going to enable nat-pmp by default, should it go in depends and be statically linked in, or be subtree'd? What do we do for other dependencies like this?
313 2019-04-25T18:15:52  *** sendak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
314 2019-04-25T18:16:36  <sipa> dongcarl: i'd say that for our normal static release builds, use depends, but from-source builds can use the system lib?
315 2019-04-25T18:17:19  <wumpus> the initial idea (that we discussed last time) was to make it part of bitcoind
316 2019-04-25T18:17:32  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
317 2019-04-25T18:17:32  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8cca1fbea9bc...c65c77c721b6
318 2019-04-25T18:17:32  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master bb530ef Pieter Wuille: Disallow extended encoding for non-witness transactions
319 2019-04-25T18:17:33  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c65c77c MarcoFalke: Merge #14039: Disallow extended encoding for non-witness transactions
320 2019-04-25T18:17:37  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
321 2019-04-25T18:17:53  <wumpus> but I don't know anymore, there's been so much discussion in the issue, haven't really been following it
322 2019-04-25T18:17:55  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
323 2019-04-25T18:17:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #14039: Disallow extended encoding for non-witness transactions (master...201808_no_superfluous_witness) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14039
324 2019-04-25T18:17:58  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
325 2019-04-25T18:18:22  <sipa> wumpus: yeah i don't know either
326 2019-04-25T18:18:25  <dongcarl> wumpus: right I believe there was some back and forth on that, I think luke-jr wanted it as a normal dependency
327 2019-04-25T18:18:36  <wumpus> dongcarl: luke-jr is always contrarian on those things
328 2019-04-25T18:20:16  <dongcarl> Okay, I want to make sure that the PR author doesn't get too confused. So if we're going to enable it by default, perhaps it makes sense to make it part of bitcoind.
329 2019-04-25T18:20:22  <wumpus> I don't really like to go over all of this again; the main reason for not using it as a library was because the upstream library looked to be unmaintained, or at least have no new releases for years
330 2019-04-25T18:20:45  <wumpus> but at this point I'd honestly be happy to see NAT-PMP *at all* at some point
331 2019-04-25T18:21:00  <wumpus> there's been so much back and forth on this that I'm kind of losing confidence that this will happen at all
332 2019-04-25T18:21:16  <wumpus> I'm *sure* the PR author is confused by this
333 2019-04-25T18:21:20  *** jarthur has quit IRC
334 2019-04-25T18:21:46  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
335 2019-04-25T18:22:28  <wumpus> we had this discussion, made some decision, then again and again he has to do something else
336 2019-04-25T18:23:08  <wumpus> honestly if I were him I'd have given it up a long time ago
337 2019-04-25T18:23:10  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
338 2019-04-25T18:23:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] instagibbs opened pull request #15893: Add test for superfulous witness record in deserialization (master...test_super_witness) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15893
339 2019-04-25T18:23:11  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
340 2019-04-25T18:24:52  <dongcarl> Okay, I'm going to follow this and help him get it thru the finish line with the assumption that 1. It'll be on by default 2. we're going with the PR author's original approach and making it part of `bitcoind`.
341 2019-04-25T18:26:31  <wumpus> thanks!
342 2019-04-25T18:28:21  <luke-jr> dongcarl: NACK bundling
343 2019-04-25T18:30:13  <luke-jr> bundling is basically universally considered a bad practice in the open source community; we have an excuse for consensus-critical stuff, but this is not that
344 2019-04-25T18:30:55  <luke-jr> (and there are multiple very good reasons it is a bad practice)
345 2019-04-25T18:36:00  *** kidney has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
346 2019-04-25T18:37:50  *** kidney has quit IRC
347 2019-04-25T18:43:39  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
348 2019-04-25T18:54:18  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
349 2019-04-25T18:59:25  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
350 2019-04-25T19:00:14  <wumpus> #startmeeting
351 2019-04-25T19:00:14  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Apr 25 19:00:14 2019 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
352 2019-04-25T19:00:14  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
353 2019-04-25T19:00:23  <jonasschnelli> hi
354 2019-04-25T19:00:37  <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator aj Chris_Stewart_5 dongcarl gwillen jamesob ken281221 ryanofsky gleb
355 2019-04-25T19:00:49  <jamesob> hi
356 2019-04-25T19:00:52  <sdaftuar> hi
357 2019-04-25T19:00:55  <luke-jr> hi
358 2019-04-25T19:01:07  <sipa> half here; will be there in 5-10 min
359 2019-04-25T19:01:10  <wumpus> one topic was proposed in https://gist.github.com/moneyball/071d608fdae217c2a6d7c35955881d8a, anything else?
360 2019-04-25T19:02:00  <wumpus> #topic high priority for review
361 2019-04-25T19:02:29  <wumpus> 6 PRs on the list: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
362 2019-04-25T19:02:47  <jamesob> can I get #15849 added? the change has been hanging out for a while, is generally useful, and I'd like it builtin for some work I'm doing on scheduler locks
363 2019-04-25T19:02:49  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15849 | Thread names in logs and deadlock debug tools by jamesob · Pull Request #15849 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
364 2019-04-25T19:02:49  <wumpus> anything to add/remove?
365 2019-04-25T19:03:19  <wumpus> jamesob:sure, added
366 2019-04-25T19:03:24  <jamesob> thanks!
367 2019-04-25T19:03:24  <phantomcircuit> wumpus, iirc the issue with nat-pmp was the quality of the upstream library more so than it's unmaintained status
368 2019-04-25T19:03:37  <wumpus> phantomcircuit: ok
369 2019-04-25T19:05:05  <wumpus> #topic 0.18.0-final early next week? (MarcoFalke)
370 2019-04-25T19:05:49  <instagibbs> hi
371 2019-04-25T19:05:50  <wumpus> seems a no-brainer, if no new regressions or critical issues come up, then -final will be tagged one week from last rc (which was monday)
372 2019-04-25T19:06:19  <achow101> ack
373 2019-04-25T19:07:07  <jnewbery> hi
374 2019-04-25T19:08:57  <wumpus> there's #15665, if someone manages to reproduce it in detail to make a fix it'd make sense to do a rc5, but I don't think it's bad enough to block the release completely
375 2019-04-25T19:08:58  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15665 | 0.18.0 rc2 CPU spike in thread bitcoin-opencon · Issue #15665 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
376 2019-04-25T19:09:22  <cfields> wumpus: fyi, I'll be away until Tues, so there may be a little delay in the win sig.
377 2019-04-25T19:09:41  <jnewbery> I feel like #15141 could be close to ready. If sipa, aj or bluematt could look at it again, I think it may be ready for merge
378 2019-04-25T19:09:43  <wumpus> cfields: no problem
379 2019-04-25T19:09:45  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15141 | Rewrite DoS interface between validation and net_processing by sdaftuar · Pull Request #15141 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
380 2019-04-25T19:09:58  <wumpus> jnewbery: how does this relate to 0.18.0?
381 2019-04-25T19:10:39  <jnewbery> oh sorry, missed that we'd moved on from #highpriority
382 2019-04-25T19:10:51  <jnewbery> not related to 0.18
383 2019-04-25T19:11:04  <wumpus> jnewbery: oh! makes sense
384 2019-04-25T19:11:41  *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
385 2019-04-25T19:11:45  <wumpus> good to know it's almost ready
386 2019-04-25T19:12:41  <sipa> here
387 2019-04-25T19:12:44  <wumpus> any other topics?
388 2019-04-25T19:12:53  <kanzure> hi
389 2019-04-25T19:13:07  <instagibbs> micro-topic, did sipa or anyone email dev list about segwit v1+ output relay
390 2019-04-25T19:13:19  <instagibbs> sorry if I missed it, I just think it's polite to announce it early
391 2019-04-25T19:13:27  <sipa> i didn't
392 2019-04-25T19:13:34  <wumpus> #topic segwit v1+ output relay announcement
393 2019-04-25T19:14:21  <sdaftuar> that seems like a strange thing to announce imo?  but fine of course if someone feels like it
394 2019-04-25T19:14:46  <instagibbs> why?
395 2019-04-25T19:14:58  <sdaftuar> if it has any impact on the network today then that seems bad!
396 2019-04-25T19:15:14  <instagibbs> it might on wonky wallets or in some way we didn't consider :)
397 2019-04-25T19:15:18  <sdaftuar> ie some service is being griefed or something
398 2019-04-25T19:15:29  <sdaftuar> sure, no harm of course
399 2019-04-25T19:15:47  <harding> instagibbs: you mean announce that it fixes wallets that try to send to v1 now but get their transactions rejected by nodes?
400 2019-04-25T19:15:53  <sipa> i think it makes sense to try encourage wallet developers to support sending to future witness versions... and to the extent that a relay policy change contributes to that it's a good thing
401 2019-04-25T19:16:05  <instagibbs> sipa, that too!
402 2019-04-25T19:16:17  <luke-jr> seems like it belongs just in release notes, but who knows who reads those
403 2019-04-25T19:16:17  <sipa> but it is not actually making any observable change to the network now
404 2019-04-25T19:16:20  <sdaftuar> sipa: i agree with that, i just worry that pointing out that v1 relay currently doesn't work might have the opposite effect
405 2019-04-25T19:16:26  <sipa> sdaftuar: ha
406 2019-04-25T19:16:38  * sipa looks at harding for opinions
407 2019-04-25T19:17:10  <instagibbs> Policy has been changed in the past and end-users(people building on top) end up quite surprised, ive seen it multiple times
408 2019-04-25T19:17:18  <instagibbs> anyways, end of topic i guess
409 2019-04-25T19:17:31  <moneyball> we could announce in optech newsletter?
410 2019-04-25T19:17:36  <harding> I'm also worried that announcing that v1 doesn't work will cause wallet authors to disable it.  I actually wrote docs suggesting that (not published) a couple weeks ago because that's what it looked like Bitcoin Core was encouraging.
411 2019-04-25T19:18:28  <sipa> small topic: what is the status of the getdata randomization? i know it was reverted for 0.18, but for master it seems there were multiple solutions
412 2019-04-25T19:19:18  <wumpus> #topic status of getdata randomization
413 2019-04-25T19:19:32  <sdaftuar> sipa: i've got a PR in progress to fix the issues, working on a test as well (that's what's holding me up from updating the pr)
414 2019-04-25T19:19:40  *** sipa has quit IRC
415 2019-04-25T19:19:54  <luke-jr> :x
416 2019-04-25T19:20:00  <sdaftuar> i guess he didn't like that answer
417 2019-04-25T19:20:14  <sdaftuar> #15834, in case anyone is curious
418 2019-04-25T19:20:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15834 | Fix NOTFOUND bug and expire getdata requests for transactions by sdaftuar · Pull Request #15834 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
419 2019-04-25T19:21:23  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
420 2019-04-25T19:21:30  <sipa> i have returned
421 2019-04-25T19:21:34  <wumpus> woohoo !
422 2019-04-25T19:21:40  <sipa> 12:19:32 < sdaftuar> sipa: i've got a PR in progress to fix the issues, working on a test as well (that's what's holding me up from updating the pr)
423 2019-04-25T19:21:45  <sipa> is the last i saw
424 2019-04-25T19:22:00  <luke-jr> right after that [19:19:40] <-- sipa (~pw@gateway/tor-sasl/sipa1024) has left this server (Remote host closed the connection).
425 2019-04-25T19:22:07  <wumpus> sdaftuar | i guess he didn't like that answer
426 2019-04-25T19:22:13  <wumpus> sdaftuar | #15834, in case anyone is curious
427 2019-04-25T19:22:16  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15834 | Fix NOTFOUND bug and expire getdata requests for transactions by sdaftuar · Pull Request #15834 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
428 2019-04-25T19:22:21  <wumpus> (and then gribble) that's all
429 2019-04-25T19:22:21  <sipa> ok, thanks
430 2019-04-25T19:23:30  <wumpus> any other topics ?
431 2019-04-25T19:25:52  <wumpus> looks like no - short meeting this time
432 2019-04-25T19:25:55  <wumpus> #endmeeting
433 2019-04-25T19:25:55  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Apr 25 19:25:55 2019 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
434 2019-04-25T19:25:55  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-04-25-19.00.html
435 2019-04-25T19:25:55  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-04-25-19.00.txt
436 2019-04-25T19:25:55  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-04-25-19.00.log.html
437 2019-04-25T19:26:10  *** anddam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
438 2019-04-25T19:26:56  <anddam> aand I got my answer
439 2019-04-25T19:27:19  <luke-jr> re NAT-PMP, apparently it's been deprecated since 2013 x.x
440 2019-04-25T19:27:54  <wumpus> the entire protocol?
441 2019-04-25T19:28:04  <wumpus> if so, in favor of what
442 2019-04-25T19:29:14  <sipa> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Control_Protocol
443 2019-04-25T19:29:17  <sipa> PCP was standardized in 2013 as a successor to the NAT Port Mapping Protocol (NAT-PMP), with which it shares similar protocol concepts and packet formats.[3]:87
444 2019-04-25T19:29:22  <anddam> just to be sure, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/wallet/wallet.cpp#L3311 is not going to add any key with -keypool=0 , right?
445 2019-04-25T19:29:22  <luke-jr> ^
446 2019-04-25T19:29:27  <sipa> i suspect libnatpmp may support both
447 2019-04-25T19:29:54  *** sipa_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
448 2019-04-25T19:30:38  * luke-jr peers at sipa
449 2019-04-25T19:30:40  <wumpus> I think that's a straightforward extension of it
450 2019-04-25T19:44:31  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
451 2019-04-25T19:44:32  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #15894: trivial, qt: Remove duplicated "Error: " prefix (master...20190425-duplicated-error-prefix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15894
452 2019-04-25T19:44:36  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
453 2019-04-25T19:45:20  <instagibbs> MarcoFalke, master is failing tests, probably because of silent merge conflict with the superfluous witness check just merged
454 2019-04-25T19:45:45  <sdaftuar> instagibbs: oops
455 2019-04-25T19:45:57  <instagibbs> i added a test... but i didnt break al lthose other ones!
456 2019-04-25T19:46:07  <instagibbs> #15893
457 2019-04-25T19:46:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15893 | Add test for superfluous witness record in deserialization by instagibbs · Pull Request #15893 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
458 2019-04-25T19:46:30  <sdaftuar> yeah i see, how did travis not catch that?
459 2019-04-25T19:46:34  <instagibbs> old PR
460 2019-04-25T19:46:37  <instagibbs> never rebased?
461 2019-04-25T19:46:47  <sdaftuar> hm, so it ran once and then never again i guess
462 2019-04-25T19:47:17  <instagibbs> drahtbot closing and opening it could have saved us :P
463 2019-04-25T19:47:26  <instagibbs> maybe
464 2019-04-25T19:47:56  <sdaftuar> i'm deeply afraid that somehow i'm going to have to rebase 15141
465 2019-04-25T19:48:11  <sdaftuar> and i'll have only myself to blame!
466 2019-04-25T19:54:57  <instagibbs> oh great, this test is now passing locally for me, even better
467 2019-04-25T19:55:53  *** cluelessperson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
468 2019-04-25T20:02:20  *** hebasto has quit IRC
469 2019-04-25T20:07:49  *** jarthur_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
470 2019-04-25T20:11:08  *** jarthur has quit IRC
471 2019-04-25T20:11:36  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472 2019-04-25T20:15:29  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
473 2019-04-25T20:24:35  *** promag has quit IRC
474 2019-04-25T20:31:35  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
475 2019-04-25T20:32:51  <instagibbs> oh heh, our tests were accidentally making witness-marked txs with no witness data, and decoding it a different way yet still hitting the condition we were checking for
476 2019-04-25T20:36:31  *** scoop has quit IRC
477 2019-04-25T20:38:12  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
478 2019-04-25T20:39:30  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
479 2019-04-25T20:40:51  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
480 2019-04-25T20:40:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #15895: QA: Avoid re-reading config.ini unnecessarily (master...redundant_configini) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15895
481 2019-04-25T20:40:56  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
482 2019-04-25T20:41:13  <instagibbs> sdaftuar, is it impossible to hit "bad-txns-vin-empty" now?
483 2019-04-25T20:41:15  <instagibbs> seems that way
484 2019-04-25T20:41:34  <instagibbs> except for peering with non-witness peers I guess
485 2019-04-25T20:43:05  *** scoop has quit IRC
486 2019-04-25T20:44:08  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
487 2019-04-25T20:45:08  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
488 2019-04-25T20:45:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #15896: QA: feature_filelock, interface_bitcoin_cli: Use PACKAGE_NAME in messages rather than hardcoding Bitcoin Core (master...qa_pkgname) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15896
489 2019-04-25T20:45:10  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
490 2019-04-25T20:47:08  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
491 2019-04-25T20:49:31  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
492 2019-04-25T20:49:32  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #15897: QA/mininode: Send all headers upfront in send_blocks_and_test to avoid sending an unconnected one (master...qa_mininode_headers) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15897
493 2019-04-25T20:49:36  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
494 2019-04-25T21:00:01  *** sendak has quit IRC
495 2019-04-25T21:00:04  *** jarthur_ has quit IRC
496 2019-04-25T21:00:40  *** hashist has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
497 2019-04-25T21:00:44  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
498 2019-04-25T21:02:04  *** scoop has quit IRC
499 2019-04-25T21:10:34  *** rev_strangehope has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
500 2019-04-25T21:17:09  *** Y_Ichiro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
501 2019-04-25T21:17:50  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
502 2019-04-25T21:19:25  *** scoop has quit IRC
503 2019-04-25T21:19:31  *** scoop_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
504 2019-04-25T21:21:36  *** rev_strangehope has quit IRC
505 2019-04-25T21:33:43  *** jhfrontz1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
506 2019-04-25T21:35:34  *** hashist has quit IRC
507 2019-04-25T21:36:28  *** scoop_ has quit IRC
508 2019-04-25T21:36:54  *** nullptr| has quit IRC
509 2019-04-25T21:36:55  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
510 2019-04-25T21:41:03  *** nullptr| has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
511 2019-04-25T21:41:28  *** scoop has quit IRC
512 2019-04-25T21:44:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
513 2019-04-25T21:52:59  *** jarthur_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
514 2019-04-25T21:56:18  *** jarthur has quit IRC
515 2019-04-25T21:56:50  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
516 2019-04-25T21:57:03  *** ElePHPhant has quit IRC
517 2019-04-25T21:57:17  *** dviola has quit IRC
518 2019-04-25T22:02:17  <luke-jr> is someone fixing the Travis failure on master, or should I do it?
519 2019-04-25T22:03:11  *** dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
520 2019-04-25T22:05:56  *** emzy has quit IRC
521 2019-04-25T22:14:16  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522 2019-04-25T22:15:15  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
523 2019-04-25T22:15:16  *** promag has quit IRC
524 2019-04-25T22:17:59  *** promag_ has quit IRC
525 2019-04-25T22:20:09  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
526 2019-04-25T22:20:48  <aj> sdaftuar: you don't just want to reuse the tests from my pr for 15834?
527 2019-04-25T22:20:53  *** scoop has quit IRC
528 2019-04-25T22:21:20  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
529 2019-04-25T22:23:04  *** promag_ has quit IRC
530 2019-04-25T22:24:10  <sdaftuar> aj: gah, i totally forgot you had tests written -- thank you, i will take a look
531 2019-04-25T22:31:37  *** scoop has quit IRC
532 2019-04-25T22:32:31  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
533 2019-04-25T22:38:24  *** jarthur_ has quit IRC
534 2019-04-25T22:39:26  *** scoop has quit IRC
535 2019-04-25T22:50:36  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
536 2019-04-25T22:52:03  *** scoop has quit IRC
537 2019-04-25T22:52:11  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
538 2019-04-25T22:56:11  *** spinza has quit IRC
539 2019-04-25T23:02:27  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
540 2019-04-25T23:09:37  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
541 2019-04-25T23:11:49  *** Zenton has quit IRC
542 2019-04-25T23:12:42  <aj> sdaftuar: heh. btw, i have some draft patches to reduce the number of 'notfound' messages; i don't think it quite gets all of them, but haven't figured out why not yet. top four commits of https://github.com/ajtowns/bitcoin/commits/201904-reduce-notfounds
543 2019-04-25T23:16:26  <gmaxwell> 16:14:07 < ghost43> https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues/5292  "BitPay BIP70 signing x509 cert has expired. Electrum will refuse to accept it."
544 2019-04-25T23:16:32  <gmaxwell> 16:14:07 < ghost43> https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues/5292  "BitPay BIP70 signing x509 cert has expired. Electrum will refuse to accept it."
545 2019-04-25T23:19:51  <ghost43> does Core accept it?
546 2019-04-25T23:20:00  <luke-jr> afaik it hasn't worked at all for Core in a while?
547 2019-04-25T23:20:09  <ghost43> ( you can create one here https://bitpay.com/181852/donate )
548 2019-04-25T23:20:43  <luke-jr> also, it would be a bug to accept it, not to reject it
549 2019-04-25T23:21:03  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
550 2019-04-25T23:22:24  <sipa> luke-jr: i think bip70 is optional at compile time, but still on in release binaries (including in 0.18)
551 2019-04-25T23:23:20  <gmaxwell> I think we were planning on turning it off in the next major release?
552 2019-04-25T23:23:21  <luke-jr> sipa: yes, but BitPay's "BIP70" isn't actually BIP70-compatible
553 2019-04-25T23:23:42  <luke-jr> sipa: supposedly they reject payments if they see the transaction broadcast before they get it over payment protocol
554 2019-04-25T23:24:08  <luke-jr> (or so I hear, I haven't tested it in a long time)
555 2019-04-25T23:24:36  <ghost43> I think it's still compatible. last I tried, they did not reject, they are just threating they will. they are rejecting for shitcoins but not bitcoin
556 2019-04-25T23:24:49  <luke-jr> ghost43: could be a race?
557 2019-04-25T23:24:54  <sipa> luke-jr: yes, i know (not sure they actually enforce this, but to be fair... it's the only sensible thing to do)
558 2019-04-25T23:25:29  <luke-jr> sipa: sensible or not, Core does do the broadcast
559 2019-04-25T23:25:36  <sipa> i know.
560 2019-04-25T23:25:44  <sipa> (and is following the spec by doing so)
561 2019-04-25T23:26:01  <sipa> but the spec has always been pointless because of this
562 2019-04-25T23:26:45  <ghost43> https://github.com/bitpay/jsonPaymentProtocol/blame/master/bip70.md#L5
563 2019-04-25T23:27:17  <ghost43> oh well that exemption is not for this broadcasting... hmm ok then not sure
564 2019-04-25T23:29:41  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
565 2019-04-25T23:36:18  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
566 2019-04-25T23:40:29  *** infernix has quit IRC
567 2019-04-25T23:55:11  *** infernix has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
568 2019-04-25T23:58:05  *** fanquake has quit IRC