1 2020-12-15T00:01:52  *** potato <potato!~Thunderbi@240d:1a:3d4:7d00:9851:bcf:fdb3:6c0d> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  2 2020-12-15T00:08:11  *** jesseposner <jesseposner!~jp@2601:643:8980:bfd2:98c1:5a96:a9af:37d1> has quit IRC (Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com)
  3 2020-12-15T00:12:44  *** mol_ <mol_!~mol@unaffiliated/molly> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2020-12-15T00:16:36  *** mol <mol!~mol@unaffiliated/molly> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
  5 2020-12-15T00:22:49  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@mx-ll-171.5.29-209.dynamic.3bb.co.th> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2020-12-15T00:22:50  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@mx-ll-171.5.29-209.dynamic.3bb.co.th> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
  7 2020-12-15T00:23:22  *** filchef <filchef!~filchef@> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  8 2020-12-15T00:29:03  *** Tennis <Tennis!~Tennis@unaffiliated/tennis> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  9 2020-12-15T00:30:51  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@mx-ll-171.5.29-209.dynamic.3bb.co.th> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2020-12-15T00:43:14  *** dermoth <dermoth!~dermoth@unaffiliated/dermoth> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 11 2020-12-15T00:57:05  *** Sebimot0 <Sebimot0!~tom@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 12 2020-12-15T00:59:03  *** dermoth <dermoth!~dermoth@unaffiliated/dermoth> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2020-12-15T01:04:17  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 14 2020-12-15T01:07:29  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 15 2020-12-15T01:07:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dhruv opened pull request #20658: ci: Move linter task to cirrus (master...linter-on-cirrus) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20658
 16 2020-12-15T01:07:31  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 17 2020-12-15T01:29:49  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw> has quit IRC ()
 18 2020-12-15T01:36:12  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2020-12-15T01:39:23  *** vasild <vasild!~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 20 2020-12-15T01:40:16  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 21 2020-12-15T01:40:30  *** joelklabo <joelklabo!~textual@108-196-216-127.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has quit IRC (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
 22 2020-12-15T01:41:06  *** vasild <vasild!~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2020-12-15T01:53:16  *** jeremyrubin <jeremyrubin!~jr@c-73-15-215-148.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 24 2020-12-15T01:58:58  *** Guest7389 <Guest7389!~uptime@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 25 2020-12-15T02:04:15  *** jeremyrubin <jeremyrubin!~jr@c-73-15-215-148.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 26 2020-12-15T02:06:27  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2020-12-15T02:10:30  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 28 2020-12-15T02:13:53  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 29 2020-12-15T02:18:38  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 30 2020-12-15T02:19:36  *** pwgn <pwgn!~pwgn@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2020-12-15T02:20:01  *** molz_ <molz_!~mol@unaffiliated/molly> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 32 2020-12-15T02:23:37  *** mol_ <mol_!~mol@unaffiliated/molly> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 33 2020-12-15T02:26:50  *** brianhoffman <brianhoffman!~brianhoff@pool-71-191-34-154.washdc.fios.verizon.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 34 2020-12-15T02:27:00  *** Klox04809318631 <Klox04809318631!~Klox@c-24-1-131-19.hsd1.il.comcast.net> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 35 2020-12-15T02:27:09  *** Klox048093186316 <Klox048093186316!~Klox@c-24-1-131-19.hsd1.il.comcast.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 36 2020-12-15T03:17:08  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2020-12-15T03:22:03  *** virtu <virtu!~virtu@gateway/tor-sasl/virtu> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 38 2020-12-15T03:33:41  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 39 2020-12-15T03:35:26  *** Asbestos_Vapor <Asbestos_Vapor!~Mercury_V@174-082-166-092.res.spectrum.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 40 2020-12-15T03:37:51  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2020-12-15T03:38:24  *** hidrodo <hidrodo!76c811dd@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 42 2020-12-15T03:38:37  *** Mercury_Vapor <Mercury_Vapor!~Mercury_V@174-082-166-092.res.spectrum.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 43 2020-12-15T03:43:15  *** virtu <virtu!~virtu@gateway/tor-sasl/virtu> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 44 2020-12-15T04:04:58  *** Evel-Knievel <Evel-Knievel!~Evel-Knie@d5152f744.static.telenet.be> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
 45 2020-12-15T04:05:14  *** Evel-Knievel <Evel-Knievel!~Evel-Knie@d5152f744.static.telenet.be> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 46 2020-12-15T04:05:27  *** justanotheruser <justanotheruser!~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 47 2020-12-15T04:10:59  *** pinheadm_ <pinheadm_!~pinheadmz@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 48 2020-12-15T04:23:57  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 49 2020-12-15T04:27:05  *** justanotheruser <justanotheruser!~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2020-12-15T04:34:57  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2020-12-15T04:39:24  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 52 2020-12-15T04:48:09  *** hidrodo <hidrodo!76c811dd@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 53 2020-12-15T04:51:47  *** onokatio <onokatio!~Thunderbi@240d:1a:833:e500:a192:a11d:eb50:7386> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2020-12-15T04:52:47  *** onokatio <onokatio!~Thunderbi@240d:1a:833:e500:a192:a11d:eb50:7386> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
 55 2020-12-15T04:54:54  *** wumpus <wumpus!~ircclient@pdpc/supporter/professional/wumpus> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 56 2020-12-15T04:55:18  *** wumpus <wumpus!~ircclient@pdpc/supporter/professional/wumpus> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 57 2020-12-15T05:14:37  *** onokatio <onokatio!~Thunderbi@240d:1a:833:e500:a192:a11d:eb50:7386> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2020-12-15T05:25:55  *** onokatio <onokatio!~Thunderbi@240d:1a:833:e500:a192:a11d:eb50:7386> has quit IRC (Quit: onokatio)
 59 2020-12-15T05:34:16  *** raj_149 <raj_149!~quassel@ec2-18-217-191-36.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com> has quit IRC (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
 60 2020-12-15T05:35:34  *** raj_149 <raj_149!~quassel@ec2-18-217-191-36.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 61 2020-12-15T05:51:43  *** hidrodo <hidrodo!76c811dd@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2020-12-15T05:52:35  *** hidrodo <hidrodo!76c811dd@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 63 2020-12-15T06:01:24  *** dermoth <dermoth!~dermoth@unaffiliated/dermoth> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 64 2020-12-15T06:04:34  *** Emcy <Emcy!~Emcy@unaffiliated/emcy> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 65 2020-12-15T06:10:11  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jon@> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 66 2020-12-15T06:10:57  *** IGHOR <IGHOR!~quassel@> has quit IRC (Quit: http://quassel-irc.org ? ??????????? ?????????. ????-??.)
 67 2020-12-15T06:12:20  *** IGHOR <IGHOR!~quassel@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 68 2020-12-15T06:16:00  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jon@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 69 2020-12-15T06:22:32  *** Emcy <Emcy!~Emcy@unaffiliated/emcy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 70 2020-12-15T06:38:50  *** dermoth <dermoth!~dermoth@unaffiliated/dermoth> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2020-12-15T07:22:16  *** kabaum <kabaum!~kabaum@h-13-35.A163.priv.bahnhof.se> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
 72 2020-12-15T07:26:03  *** DeanGuss <DeanGuss!~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2020-12-15T08:12:49  <yanmaani> When running Core, I got the following error, because my blocks/ folder was a broken symlink (target unmounted):
 74 2020-12-15T08:13:13  <yanmaani> boost::filesystem::create_directory: File exists: "/x/Data/blocks"
 75 2020-12-15T08:13:32  <yanmaani> I'm curious - where is the call to create_directory? Because it's only used in tests, as far as I can see
 76 2020-12-15T08:15:57  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2020-12-15T08:23:11  *** queip <queip!~queip@unaffiliated/rezurus> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 78 2020-12-15T08:27:57  *** queip <queip!~queip@unaffiliated/rezurus> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 79 2020-12-15T08:29:23  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2020-12-15T08:29:24  <bitcoin-git> [gui] jonasschnelli merged pull request #115: Replace "Hide tray icon" option with positive "Show tray icon" one  (master...201024-tray) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/115
 81 2020-12-15T08:29:24  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 82 2020-12-15T08:29:43  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 83 2020-12-15T08:29:44  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/94a9cd25fd17...33d633726922
 84 2020-12-15T08:29:45  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 17174f8 Hennadii Stepanov: gui: Replace "Hide tray icon" option with positive "Show tray icon" one
 85 2020-12-15T08:29:46  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 03edb52 Hennadii Stepanov: qt: Remove redundant BitcoinGUI::setTrayIconVisible
 86 2020-12-15T08:29:47  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 33d6337 Jonas Schnelli: Merge bitcoin-core/gui#115: Replace "Hide tray icon" option with positive ...
 87 2020-12-15T08:29:48  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 88 2020-12-15T08:30:18  <jonasschnelli> yanmaani: GetBlocksDir() in system.cpp
 89 2020-12-15T08:31:13  <yanmaani> ah, thanks
 90 2020-12-15T08:33:39  *** gribble <gribble!~gribble@unaffiliated/nanotube/bot/gribble> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 91 2020-12-15T08:34:43  <jnewbery> andytoshi: if you're mining to the wallet's address, you could call generate(), get the block hash, fetch the coinbase txid, and then wait_until() the wallet's listunspent includes that transaction output
 92 2020-12-15T08:51:19  *** pwgn <pwgn!~pwgn@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 93 2020-12-15T09:08:55  *** EagleTM <EagleTM!~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 94 2020-12-15T09:12:06  *** creffett|irssi <creffett|irssi!~creffett|@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 95 2020-12-15T09:14:02  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@mx-ll-171.5.29-209.dynamic.3bb.co.th> has quit IRC (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
 96 2020-12-15T09:17:22  *** gribble <gribble!~gribble@unaffiliated/nanotube/bot/gribble> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2020-12-15T09:20:30  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 98 2020-12-15T09:28:53  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 99 2020-12-15T09:40:52  *** jeremyrubin <jeremyrubin!~jr@c-73-15-215-148.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
100 2020-12-15T09:58:38  *** promag_ <promag_!~promag@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
101 2020-12-15T09:59:53  *** promag_ <promag_!~promag@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102 2020-12-15T10:04:28  *** kexkey <kexkey!~kexkey@static-198-54-132-174.cust.tzulo.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
103 2020-12-15T10:47:49  *** hhghhkqweaeasd <hhghhkqweaeasd!~flack@p200300d46f24de0023b487635c149e9b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
104 2020-12-15T10:47:57  *** kljasdfvv <kljasdfvv!~flack@p200300d46f24de00a3ce7892b0332293.dip0.t-ipconnect.de> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
105 2020-12-15T10:57:41  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@mx-ll-171.5.29-209.dynamic.3bb.co.th> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
106 2020-12-15T11:03:59  *** sr_gi <sr_gi!~sr_gi@> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
107 2020-12-15T11:04:25  *** sr_gi <sr_gi!~sr_gi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
108 2020-12-15T11:18:30  *** Britney33Rosenba <Britney33Rosenba!~Britney33@static.> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
109 2020-12-15T11:22:56  *** Britney33Rosenba <Britney33Rosenba!~Britney33@static.> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
110 2020-12-15T11:28:23  *** yanmaani <yanmaani!~yanmaani@gateway/tor-sasl/yanmaani> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
111 2020-12-15T11:30:44  <wumpus> luke-jr: qthreadpoolthread is used with qthreadpool, which is used by qconcurrent (high level concurrency framework), neither of which we AFAIK currently use... even then, 64 seems excessive, but i guess they didn't really think about the scenario with so many cores. They should all be constantly sleeping so I guess it's not much overhead besides some memory
112 2020-12-15T11:31:43  <wumpus> using QRunnable for some things sounds interesting
113 2020-12-15T11:35:06  *** yanmaani <yanmaani!~yanmaani@gateway/tor-sasl/yanmaani> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2020-12-15T11:37:02  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@mx-ll-171.5.29-209.dynamic.3bb.co.th> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
115 2020-12-15T12:25:32  *** creffett|irssi <creffett|irssi!~creffett|@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
116 2020-12-15T12:49:28  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
117 2020-12-15T12:49:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 6 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/33d633726922...f1f2418433c9
118 2020-12-15T12:49:30  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2f3f1ae fanquake: net: remove SetMaxOutboundTarget
119 2020-12-15T12:49:31  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b117eb1 fanquake: net: remove SetMaxOutboundTimeframe
120 2020-12-15T12:49:32  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 173d0d3 fanquake: net: remove nMaxOutboundTimeframe from connection options
121 2020-12-15T12:49:34  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2020-12-15T12:49:48  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
123 2020-12-15T12:49:48  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #20253: net: use std::chrono throughout maxOutbound logic (master...net_unused_outbound) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20253
124 2020-12-15T12:49:49  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
125 2020-12-15T12:56:02  *** Highway61 <Highway61!~Thunderbi@unaffiliated/highway61> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2020-12-15T13:13:12  *** einyx <einyx!einyx@fsf/member/einyx> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
127 2020-12-15T13:16:41  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
128 2020-12-15T13:16:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #20660: Move signet onion seed from v2 to v3 (master...2020/12/signet-v3-onion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20660
129 2020-12-15T13:16:42  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
130 2020-12-15T13:26:50  *** mol <mol!~mol@unaffiliated/molly> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2020-12-15T13:29:16  *** molz_ <molz_!~mol@unaffiliated/molly> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
132 2020-12-15T13:29:22  *** spake <spake!~spake@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
133 2020-12-15T13:34:13  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@2403:6200:8876:cecf:a55b:90cf:1ae1:4d7b> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
134 2020-12-15T13:36:10  *** vasild_ <vasild_!~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
135 2020-12-15T13:36:11  *** vasild <vasild!~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild> has quit IRC (Disconnected by services)
136 2020-12-15T13:36:12  *** vasild_ is now known as vasild
137 2020-12-15T13:40:52  *** lontivero <lontivero!~lontivero@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
138 2020-12-15T13:50:28  *** mol_ <mol_!~mol@unaffiliated/molly> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
139 2020-12-15T13:53:30  *** einyx <einyx!~einyx@fsf/member/einyx> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
140 2020-12-15T13:53:31  *** mol <mol!~mol@unaffiliated/molly> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
141 2020-12-15T13:54:36  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142 2020-12-15T13:55:43  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
143 2020-12-15T13:56:21  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
144 2020-12-15T14:03:59  *** Lightlike <Lightlike!b9ff439e@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
145 2020-12-15T14:05:41  *** Lightlike <Lightlike!b9ff439e@> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2020-12-15T14:08:10  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
147 2020-12-15T14:11:53  *** einyx <einyx!~einyx@fsf/member/einyx> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
148 2020-12-15T14:12:01  *** einyx_ <einyx_!~einyx@fsf/member/einyx> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
149 2020-12-15T14:13:39  *** pinheadmz <pinheadmz!~pinheadmz@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
150 2020-12-15T14:19:04  *** vincenzopalazzo <vincenzopalazzo!~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:5809:f8dd:2776:36cd> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2020-12-15T14:21:08  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@2403:6200:8876:cecf:a55b:90cf:1ae1:4d7b> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
152 2020-12-15T14:30:07  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
153 2020-12-15T14:34:03  <jnewbery> Hi folks. We have a p2p meeting in half an hour. Only one proposed topic so far: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/P2P-IRC-meetings#15-dec-2020. Feel free to add topics between now and 15:00 UTC.
154 2020-12-15T14:34:07  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15 | Option to specify external IP address · Issue #15 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
155 2020-12-15T14:35:19  <jnewbery> We won't have our normal meeting in two weeks' time (29 Dec), so this is the last p2p meeting of the year. The next will be on 12 Jan 2021.
156 2020-12-15T14:35:25  <harding> I heard there was a problem with osx signing.  Does that mean https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.21.0/test.rc3/bitcoin-0.21.0rc3-osx.dmg is not going to work or will print some scary warning to users who try to run it?
157 2020-12-15T14:36:59  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
158 2020-12-15T14:46:14  <jonasschnelli> harding: it will not run
159 2020-12-15T14:46:31  <jonasschnelli> harding: but you can use the unsigned version and right-click start it
160 2020-12-15T14:46:51  <harding> jonasschnelli: ok, good to know.  Thanks!
161 2020-12-15T14:56:14  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162 2020-12-15T14:56:50  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
163 2020-12-15T14:57:32  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
164 2020-12-15T15:00:46  <MarcoFalke> meeting?
165 2020-12-15T15:01:02  <jnewbery> #startmeeting
166 2020-12-15T15:01:02  <core-meetingbot> Meeting started Tue Dec 15 15:01:02 2020 UTC.  The chair is jnewbery. Information about MeetBot at https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings.
167 2020-12-15T15:01:02  <core-meetingbot> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
168 2020-12-15T15:01:09  <jnewbery> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: achow101 aj amiti ariard bluematt cfields Chris_Stewart_5 digi_james dongcarl elichai2 emilengler fanquake fjahr gleb gmaxwell gwillen hebasto instagibbs jamesob jb55 jeremyrubin jl2012 jnewbery jonasschnelli jonatack jtimon kallewoof kanzure kvaciral lightlike luke-jr maaku marcofalke meshcollider michagogo moneyball morcos nehan NicolasDorier paveljanik petertodd
169 2020-12-15T15:01:12  <gleb> Hi
170 2020-12-15T15:01:15  <jnewbery> phantomcircuit promag provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar sipa vasild wumpus
171 2020-12-15T15:01:21  *** Lightlike <Lightlike!b9ff439e@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172 2020-12-15T15:01:22  <jonatack> hi
173 2020-12-15T15:01:30  <ariard> hi
174 2020-12-15T15:01:42  <aj> hey
175 2020-12-15T15:01:44  <ajonas> Hi
176 2020-12-15T15:01:52  <jnewbery> hi all. Welcome to the last p2p meeting of 2020!
177 2020-12-15T15:01:58  <fanquake> hi
178 2020-12-15T15:02:25  <jnewbery> We have one proposed topic: Review of the P2P Review Process (ariard). Before we get into that, does anyone have any proposed topics that they want to add?
179 2020-12-15T15:03:23  <jnewbery> ok, onto our one topic
180 2020-12-15T15:03:33  <jnewbery> #topic Review of the P2P Review Process (ariard)
181 2020-12-15T15:03:33  <core-meetingbot> topic: Review of the P2P Review Process (ariard)
182 2020-12-15T15:03:39  <ariard> hi
183 2020-12-15T15:04:18  <ariard> so as it's the last p2p meeting of 2020, it's a great opportunity to review our p2p review process
184 2020-12-15T15:05:05  <ariard> so I just have an opening question and let's discuss from it
185 2020-12-15T15:05:27  <ariard> which PR reviews stand-out as productive and which were productive ?
186 2020-12-15T15:05:37  <ariard> is there anything we can learn from these examples
187 2020-12-15T15:05:50  <ariard> I did attach some past PRs on the wiki page : https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/P2P-IRC-meetings
188 2020-12-15T15:06:23  <ariard> let's start by a roundtable, can anyone tell one PR review liked on the past year :) ?
189 2020-12-15T15:06:45  <gleb> I think the topic is worthy but it’s much broader then what we can discuss here in tea time, although gathering initial thoughts might work
190 2020-12-15T15:07:00  <gleb> in real time*
191 2020-12-15T15:07:20  <ariard> gleb: that's fine start by sharing your initial thoughts
192 2020-12-15T15:07:33  <MarcoFalke> So I think the review process hasn't changed fundamentally in the past years. We made some minor changes to ACKs (allowing them to be more verbose, Approach, Concept, ...), also there is a REVIEWERS file where people can sign up for notifications if their watched file changes...
193 2020-12-15T15:07:36  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
194 2020-12-15T15:08:17  <MarcoFalke> Though, based on the blog post by ajonas many raised a concern that review isn't focussed enough.
195 2020-12-15T15:08:18  <gleb> I haven’t really noticed REVIEWERS file in action yet, although I liked the concept
196 2020-12-15T15:08:36  <MarcoFalke> I see that too, escpecially on larger pulls.
197 2020-12-15T15:08:41  <kanzure> there was a recent twitter survey asking whether reviews feel different lately. an actual non-twitter survey might be helpful.
198 2020-12-15T15:08:58  <ariard> MarcoFalke: which blog post? didn't read it
199 2020-12-15T15:09:01  <gleb> kanzure: ack but asking the right question matters
200 2020-12-15T15:09:16  <jonatack> ariard: in general, i can think of many outstanding reviews (and there are some outstanding reviewers). Coverage of great reviews was actually proposed one year ago for Bitcoin Optech: https://github.com/bitcoinops/bitcoinops.github.io/issues/301
201 2020-12-15T15:09:17  <MarcoFalke> ariard: kanzure: ajonas did a writeup on a 2019 survey
202 2020-12-15T15:09:30  <MarcoFalke> was shared in the last general meeting
203 2020-12-15T15:09:38  <ariard> ah this one, okay
204 2020-12-15T15:09:54  <ajonas> https://adamjonas.com/bitcoin/coredev/retro/coredev-2019-retro/
205 2020-12-15T15:10:34  <MarcoFalke> So I think it would be good if there was a signal where a contributor could simply express interest in doing a review (at a later time)
206 2020-12-15T15:10:58  <jonatack> ariard: I have a short exposition on this topic that I wrote in reply to your question yesterday, can present it here after the meeting or maybe a as twitter thread
207 2020-12-15T15:11:19  <ariard> jonatack: yes I feel sometimes it's hard to have a clear overview of what's the blocker for the PR (waiting author, dependency, moar-concept-ack, metrics, ...)
208 2020-12-15T15:11:19  <MarcoFalke> Then, it would be easier for maintainers to gather how much review interest there is and based on that ping people at around the same time to start digging into the review
209 2020-12-15T15:12:30  <ariard> MarcoFalke: agree, 19858 is a good example, it's a PR with a lot of context and you want to avoid wasting review time if your the only one doing a review for the coming month
210 2020-12-15T15:12:38  <MarcoFalke> It could be as simple as saying "Concept ACK (willing to upgrade to review ACK)"
211 2020-12-15T15:12:38  <ariard> a recent good example
212 2020-12-15T15:12:43  <MarcoFalke> #19858
213 2020-12-15T15:12:47  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19858 | Periodically make block-relay connections and sync headers by sdaftuar · Pull Request #19858 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
214 2020-12-15T15:12:51  <jnewbery> MarcoFalke: for myself, if I've concept ACKed a PR, then it almost always means that I intend to review the code later (and would be receptive to the author/maintainer pinging me if I hadn't)
215 2020-12-15T15:13:34  <aj> personally, i'm bothered by https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20599#issuecomment-741631081 ; my opinion is that we should be thoroughly reviewing all p2p changes because there's potential for interactions, so going easy on "boring" PRs seems very unsafe. beyond that, there's a lot of not very beneficial refactoring PRs, that are also causing extra dev and review rework on PRs that change the
216 2020-12-15T15:13:34  <aj> code's behaviour
217 2020-12-15T15:13:37  <MarcoFalke> jnewbery: I think we can't assume that generally. Often I say Concept ACK, but I mean "Concept ACK, but I am not confident in reviewing this or I don't have the motivation"
218 2020-12-15T15:13:55  *** sr_gi <sr_gi!~sr_gi@> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
219 2020-12-15T15:14:34  *** sr_gi <sr_gi!~sr_gi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
220 2020-12-15T15:14:56  <MarcoFalke> ariard: Good example. The pull had 4 ACKs at some point, but was merged with less. I think it was a bit unclear to maintainers if more people are interested in testing/reviewing or if the review motivation has been used up already on that pull
221 2020-12-15T15:15:40  <ariard> aj: agree and you have to spend a lot of time just to have confidence you have you don't have interactions, even slight ones
222 2020-12-15T15:16:25  <ajonas> I think encouraging opinions often and early is the main goal of a concept/approach ACK. People may have varying interest in following up as the PR moves into a lower-level kind of review.
223 2020-12-15T15:16:32  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has quit IRC (Quit: Pavlenex)
224 2020-12-15T15:16:32  <jnewbery> MarcoFalke: I think that's fair. My default (concept ACK implies a later review ACK and explicitly say "I won't review this later" if you don't intend to review later) is perhaps the opposite from other people.
225 2020-12-15T15:16:40  <ariard> I do feel sometimes stack small refactor in bigger PR, even with bigger diff might be actually to review, because less cognitive spreading to reload the code model each time
226 2020-12-15T15:17:20  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@2403:6200:8876:cecf:a55b:90cf:1ae1:4d7b> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
227 2020-12-15T15:17:45  <ariard> MarcoFalke: yes I think that's a good initiative for maintainers to ping/engage past reviewers if they're still interested to review  again
228 2020-12-15T15:18:04  <MarcoFalke> aj: Also a good point. I think it would be easier for maintainers to know how much resistance there is if NACKs or ~mehs were thrown out more agressively
229 2020-12-15T15:18:16  <aj> ariard: i think limiting refactors to ones that are immediately useful as part of either implementing a feature, fixing a bug or improving automated tests would be a huge improvement. (or perhaps as followups to a PR that's hit its preserve-acks-no-more-nits limit)
230 2020-12-15T15:18:43  <MarcoFalke> I have the feeling that many shy away from a NACK or -0, but that shouldn't be
231 2020-12-15T15:18:44  <jonatack> ariard: i agree (and do that) but bigger PRs scare off reviewers and it doesn't always work out. knowing how much to put in a PR and how much to leave out is the hardest part for me TBH
232 2020-12-15T15:19:17  <jnewbery> aj: 20599 was thoroughly reviewed. It had 5 ACKs
233 2020-12-15T15:19:26  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2020-12-15T15:20:39  <ariard> aj: yes what we might have to weight more carefully is the "immediately" I feel for some features you will have to stack multiple refactors before to have the ground ready for new stuff, e.g mempool
235 2020-12-15T15:20:56  <aj> ariard: immediately == different commits in the same PR
236 2020-12-15T15:21:15  <aj> ariard: or, like taproot, commits pulled out of a large PR that's already open and available for review
237 2020-12-15T15:21:27  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
238 2020-12-15T15:21:30  *** miketwen_ <miketwen_!~miketwent@ec2-3-216-176-187.compute-1.amazonaws.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
239 2020-12-15T15:21:36  <ariard> aj: okay but not preparatory-PR-for-some-future-feature, like sdaftuar did for motivating workspace in mempool a back while?
240 2020-12-15T15:22:14  <aj> ariard: the package relay stuff? it had a concurrent PR implementing packages via orphans?
241 2020-12-15T15:22:54  <ariard> aj: this one https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16400
242 2020-12-15T15:23:16  <ariard> which was a substantial diff
243 2020-12-15T15:23:21  <aj> ariard: yeah, it had #16401
244 2020-12-15T15:23:26  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16401 | Add package acceptance logic to mempool by sdaftuar · Pull Request #16401 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
245 2020-12-15T15:23:44  *** mj_node <mj_node!~mj_node@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2020-12-15T15:24:12  <ariard> jonatack: yeah I've a preference for a bit more substantial PR but it's so much tied to everyone review workflow
247 2020-12-15T15:24:29  <ariard> and past experience with a part of the codebase
248 2020-12-15T15:24:29  <jonatack> MarcoFalke: one thing it might be helpful to have signals from maintainers about, is if follow-ups are desired for the review comments that weren't taken or for missing coverage, e.g. 19858 would be an example
249 2020-12-15T15:24:52  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
250 2020-12-15T15:25:00  <jonatack> ariard: yes
251 2020-12-15T15:26:22  <ariard> aj: my point is sometimes it can be hard to justify one-individual-refactor but they make sense when you zoom out or point to following PR
252 2020-12-15T15:26:41  <ariard> like if we move towards isolating block-relay from tx-relay, it won't happen with one big PR?
253 2020-12-15T15:26:43  <MarcoFalke> jonatack: As a maintainer I try to keep those decicions up to the reviewers/other contributors. I don't want to "rule" the project too much.
254 2020-12-15T15:26:57  <jonatack> MarcoFalke: that's fair
255 2020-12-15T15:27:47  <ariard> jonatack: I do feel we could track follow-ups better, most of the time it's not they're relevant, it's just to much changes for a PR or the PR is already super mature
256 2020-12-15T15:27:56  <ariard> GH doesn't have a follow-ups pinning board?
257 2020-12-15T15:27:57  <jonatack> ariard: I also like PRs that do things well, even if that makes them more substantial...not sure if I would have said the same a year ago, though
258 2020-12-15T15:28:40  <ariard> jonatack: agree to have them strong test coverage, but when it's code style or slight features changes the list of follow-ups might be infinite?
259 2020-12-15T15:28:42  <gleb> ariard: explicitly motivating refactors with some future work would help.
260 2020-12-15T15:28:48  <aj> ariard: if you can point to a following PR, include the refactor in that PR
261 2020-12-15T15:30:36  <ariard> gleb: yes it sounds tied to context-tracking, maybe we could improve it with the wiki? it's widely used to advertise state of the ongoing work around i2p?
262 2020-12-15T15:31:21  <jonatack> ariard: yes, in practice i mostly leave it to the PR author to follow-up or not, there are always other priorities to do and review
263 2020-12-15T15:31:33  <aj> ariard: isn't creating an issue the obvious thing to do if a PR needs followups and you can't just create the followup PR straight away?
264 2020-12-15T15:31:36  <jonatack> that's probably what most do
265 2020-12-15T15:31:38  <gleb> ariard: I think even just mentioning it in the first PR comment would help. Wiki stuff may be too much.
266 2020-12-15T15:32:57  <ariard> jonatack: right I think it's the job of the reviewer to clearly say when comments are blockers or nice-to-follow-ups
267 2020-12-15T15:33:15  <gleb> aj: I think creating issues for follow-ups might be a good idea.
268 2020-12-15T15:34:31  <ariard> aj: well GH issue have the concern they're great to discuss but not really to sum up the state of a discussion IMO?
269 2020-12-15T15:34:44  *** mj_node <mj_node!~mj_node@> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
270 2020-12-15T15:34:57  <ariard> specially for contributors onboarding on the state of an ongoing work and willingly to participate
271 2020-12-15T15:35:38  <jonatack> an issue to centralise the tracking of the effects of 19858 seems like a good idea, for example
272 2020-12-15T15:35:39  <aj> ariard: edit the first comment to maintain a summary?
273 2020-12-15T15:35:52  <ariard> what people feeling about prepatory document like jamesob did for assumeutxo a while back ?
274 2020-12-15T15:35:59  <jonatack> resource usage, peer rotation, the bug aj reported, etc.
275 2020-12-15T15:36:22  <jnewbery> I personally wish that we'd not need so many follow-up PRs and just get things right the first time
276 2020-12-15T15:36:31  <jonatack> jnewbery: agreed
277 2020-12-15T15:37:05  <jnewbery> The attitude of "we know that there are problems with this but we'll merge it now and fix it up later" doesn't seem right for this project
278 2020-12-15T15:37:24  <vasild> hi
279 2020-12-15T15:37:27  <ariard> jnewbery: ideally but getting the "things right", each contributor has a different opinion because different priorities/concerns?
280 2020-12-15T15:37:44  <jamesob> hi
281 2020-12-15T15:37:48  <jonatack> jnewbery: that was unique to this project for me, it seems related to the review bottleneck / preservation of review
282 2020-12-15T15:38:41  <ariard> aj: yes sound a best practice, and lighter than pinning stuff in wiki
283 2020-12-15T15:39:31  <MarcoFalke> I think if something is moving in the wrong direction, we should hold back on merging it, but if there are issues unrelated or tangential to the change that may have existed previously or may be controversial to change, it is up to the pull author to address them or not
284 2020-12-15T15:39:51  <jonatack> new people take a long time to become experienced reviewers, and it the meantime the increased activity structurally increases the bottleneck
285 2020-12-15T15:41:43  <ariard> that kind of prepatory document: https://github.com/jamesob/assumeutxo-docs/tree/2019-04-proposal/proposal, I think amiti did the same for mempools reworks, and IMO it's pretty cool to get the rational of some proposed changes, including contra opinions
286 2020-12-15T15:42:23  <aj> jnewbery: imo review time is the most constrained resource and we should be optimising for it; a big change and a small followup is better than multiple reworks of a big change; likewise having a big change merged quicker, so that it doesn't end up conflicting with other changes, thus requiring further re-review
287 2020-12-15T15:43:31  <MarcoFalke> Adding a new commit to a pull that has reviews might better be done in a new pull, because it doesn't invalidate existing review . Though, if one of the commits in the pull is moving in the wrong direction, it might be better to fix it up if everyone agrees.
288 2020-12-15T15:43:52  <ariard> MarcoFalke: obviously, if it's introducing flagrant bugs or security concerns we should hold it, but when it's code structure where people have different tolerances harder to come to a consensus...
289 2020-12-15T15:44:15  <jnewbery> I think #16702 is a very good example of people saying "let's merge this now and fix in follow-ups". There have been at least 8 PRs to fix up the under-reviewed changes, and there are still outstanding bugs over a year later
290 2020-12-15T15:44:18  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16702 | p2p: supplying and using asmap to improve IP bucketing in addrman by naumenkogs · Pull Request #16702 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
291 2020-12-15T15:44:36  <jonatack> aj: agree, this all relates back to that constraint
292 2020-12-15T15:44:44  <jnewbery> That's not saving review time. It would have been much more efficient to just review it properly the first time round
293 2020-12-15T15:45:01  <jonatack> so if we can move to loosen it, we can do better in the direction jnewbery is pointing out
294 2020-12-15T15:45:54  <gleb> My intuitiion was that follow-ups are often less important than the core part of the PR, that's why focusing on the core part made sense.
295 2020-12-15T15:46:49  *** palazzovincenzo <palazzovincenzo!~vincent@93-35-218-68.ip56.fastwebnet.it> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
296 2020-12-15T15:46:58  <luke-jr> jnewbery: +1
297 2020-12-15T15:47:44  <jonatack> i also think that pairing 2 complementary people to work on some PRs together, pre-review, could be beneficial
298 2020-12-15T15:48:23  <jonatack> on an ad-hoc, informal basis, but worth exploring
299 2020-12-15T15:48:58  <jnewbery> it was under-reviewed and broke peers.dat serialization for two releases. Reviewers and the PR author were urging the maintainers to merge now and fix issues in follow-ups. I don't understand why there was such a rush to get it merged.
300 2020-12-15T15:49:03  <vasild> jonatack: +1
301 2020-12-15T15:49:24  <ariard> jonatack: +1, specially on the complementarity
302 2020-12-15T15:49:47  *** vincenzopalazzo <vincenzopalazzo!~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:5809:f8dd:2776:36cd> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
303 2020-12-15T15:49:53  <MarcoFalke> jnewbery: I also agree, but I think that means that reviewers should be shy in giving out ACKs and comfortable in giving out NACKs
304 2020-12-15T15:49:57  <MarcoFalke> Another example is #19569
305 2020-12-15T15:50:02  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19569 | Enable fetching of orphan parents from wtxid peers by sipa · Pull Request #19569 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
306 2020-12-15T15:50:14  <MarcoFalke> It was ACKed despite a known remote crasher bug
307 2020-12-15T15:50:18  <MarcoFalke> (and merged)
308 2020-12-15T15:50:24  <luke-jr> surprised explicit feerates hasn't been mentioned XD
309 2020-12-15T15:51:08  <aj> MarcoFalke: huh? the remote crasher bug was known before it was merged?
310 2020-12-15T15:51:30  <MarcoFalke> aj: Oh it wasn't? Maybe I missed that
311 2020-12-15T15:52:02  <MarcoFalke> I presumed it was based on this comment: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19569#discussion_r462887483
312 2020-12-15T15:52:08  <ariard> there is also a point when some PRs are approaching the upper bound of review ability like #19988, at least at some point you feel you won't provide anymore review value
313 2020-12-15T15:52:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19988 | Overhaul transaction request logic by sipa · Pull Request #19988 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
314 2020-12-15T15:52:47  <jnewbery> I thought it was possible that there was a remote crash bug, but hadn't identified how to exploit it
315 2020-12-15T15:53:16  <aj> MarcoFalke: i thought it was "here's a cleanup we should do in a followup" ... "oops, that cleanup fixes a crash"
316 2020-12-15T15:53:24  <jnewbery> I offered a fix to make it safer, and the response was "let's fix it separately"
317 2020-12-15T15:53:33  <MarcoFalke> ariard: I think it is still good to review, and maybe clarify that it is a "weaker" review
318 2020-12-15T15:54:27  *** davterra <davterra!~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
319 2020-12-15T15:54:41  <ariard> jnewbery: when you feel a PR is under-reviewed but still conceptually agree with it, I think a worthy contribution it's to point out the PR doesn't meet project standards on test coverage, code style, documentation and point to good past examples?
320 2020-12-15T15:54:53  *** davterra <davterra!~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
321 2020-12-15T15:54:53  *** kexkey <kexkey!~kexkey@static-198-54-132-174.cust.tzulo.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
322 2020-12-15T15:55:02  *** davterra <davterra!~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
323 2020-12-15T15:55:24  <luke-jr> ariard: by the time it matters, it's merged :/
324 2020-12-15T15:55:34  <jnewbery> ariard: those suggestions are often dismissed as 'pointless refactors' or 'nits'
325 2020-12-15T15:55:56  <ariard> luke-jr: I mean when the PR isn't merged yet but you don't have the time to review it now but still want to inform about your opinion?
326 2020-12-15T15:56:26  <luke-jr> ariard: we'd be posting "this is underreviewed" constantly, because we don't know when some merger might not recognise it?
327 2020-12-15T15:57:14  <gleb> It's hard for me to imagine how one can call a suggestion to improve the safety a "pointless refactor". One is a behavior change, the other is not.
328 2020-12-15T15:57:23  *** belcher_ <belcher_!~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
329 2020-12-15T15:57:59  <ariard> jnewbery: IMO increasing project standards is something you do over time and not overnight, so yes you might have to constantly make the point until other contributors share them?
330 2020-12-15T15:58:01  <vasild> Is anybody interested in discussing I2P connectivity?
331 2020-12-15T15:58:44  <jonatack> vasild: sure
332 2020-12-15T15:58:48  <ariard> luke-jr: yeah andGH sucks to clearly gather comment or identify ACK/NACKs, it could be its own feature, not regular comments?
333 2020-12-15T15:58:51  <jonatack> (after the topic)
334 2020-12-15T15:59:00  <vasild> ok, lets discuss after the meeting
335 2020-12-15T15:59:25  <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: I think a good metric to see if something is close to merge is to look at the existing ACKs. If there is worry that something gets merged "underreviewed" with ACKs, you best leave a comment saying that
336 2020-12-15T16:00:07  <jnewbery> ok, that's time folks
337 2020-12-15T16:00:21  <ariard> thanks for participating :)
338 2020-12-15T16:00:32  *** belcher <belcher!~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
339 2020-12-15T16:00:34  <MarcoFalke> ariard: Thanks for the topic suggestion
340 2020-12-15T16:00:47  <jonatack> ariard, you asked yesterday how to qualify if the review bottleneck is improving
341 2020-12-15T16:00:48  <jnewbery> Reminder: that was the last p2p meeting this year. We'll meet again on 12-Jan-2021
342 2020-12-15T16:01:03  <jnewbery> #endmeeting
343 2020-12-15T16:01:03  <core-meetingbot> topic: Bitcoin Core development discussion and commit log | Feel free to watch, but please take commentary and usage questions to #bitcoin | Channel logs: http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/, http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/ | Meeting topics http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/proposedmeetingtopics.txt / http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/proposedwalletmeetingtopics.txt
344 2020-12-15T16:01:03  <core-meetingbot> Meeting ended Tue Dec 15 16:01:03 2020 UTC.
345 2020-12-15T16:01:03  <core-meetingbot> Minutes:        https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings/logs/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-12-15-15.01.moin.txt
346 2020-12-15T16:01:10  *** Lightlike <Lightlike!b9ff439e@> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
347 2020-12-15T16:01:12  <jonatack> ariard: 2 reasonable rough proxies might be: open issues and pulls, and distribution of funding
348 2020-12-15T16:01:17  <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: that might work
349 2020-12-15T16:01:59  <jonatack> Open pull requests saw new records during the past year
350 2020-12-15T16:02:02  <jonatack> reaching a peak in late May or early June iirc and staying roughly stable at that level since
351 2020-12-15T16:02:11  <jonatack> Funding-wise, 2020 was a banner year, and yet at the same time a half-dozen good reviewers faced funding cuts
352 2020-12-15T16:02:18  <ariard> jonatack: I'm a bit skeptical sometimes about pure quantiative metrics like "open issues" obviously they're likely a good sign but doesn't indicate if the underlying discussion are better, sane, productive, ...
353 2020-12-15T16:02:33  <vasild> https://calendar.google.com/calendar/u/0/r/month/2020/12/1?cid=MTFwcXZkZ3BkOTlubGliZjliYTg2MXZ1OHNAZ3JvdXAuY2FsZW5kYXIuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbQ -- shows p2p meeting on Dec 29
354 2020-12-15T16:02:44  <vasild> (I can't edit it)
355 2020-12-15T16:02:53  <jonatack> ariard: yes, that's why i use the word proxies, but we don't have anything easy that is better
356 2020-12-15T16:02:58  <ariard> jonatack: it's super hard and I'm still too much a newcomer to say "it was better/worse" before :)
357 2020-12-15T16:03:04  <jonatack> An informal, very simple, one question twitter poll about the situation is still open here for a few more hours
358 2020-12-15T16:03:10  <jonatack> https://twitter.com/jonatack/status/1338614214294966279
359 2020-12-15T16:03:19  <jonatack> ariard: yes, I can't say if experienced and consistent review/testing are decreasing
360 2020-12-15T16:03:28  <jonatack> or are steady or increasing but just not keeping up with the increased activity
361 2020-12-15T16:03:44  <luke-jr> FWIW, I think the number of upstream bugs I find rebasing Knots has been increasing
362 2020-12-15T16:04:09  <jonatack> It takes time to develop experienced reviewers on this project
363 2020-12-15T16:04:19  <luke-jr> but it's not something I actively try to count, and perception is hard
364 2020-12-15T16:04:23  <jonatack> so structurally it makes sense that more people participating
365 2020-12-15T16:04:28  <jonatack> would initially cause a review crunch
366 2020-12-15T16:04:40  <jonatack> though testing, on the other hand, can be done by relatively new people
367 2020-12-15T16:04:48  <ariard> luke-jr: that's not good sign for sure
368 2020-12-15T16:05:00  <luke-jr> jonatack: review, even though perhaps not experienced, is also a good way for newcomers to learn
369 2020-12-15T16:05:04  <jonatack> so, there may to be a misalignment of incentives
370 2020-12-15T16:05:15  <jonatack> that encourages people to not spend too much time reviewing and testing
371 2020-12-15T16:05:23  <jonatack> e.g. I think most would agree that commits/merges, research, mailing list posts, and interviews/podcasts/outreach are more newsworthy and garner far more accolades than review and testing
372 2020-12-15T16:05:35  <ariard> I agree you don't have to be experienced to review, and the review you're doing as a newcomer are likely to be really different and complementary
373 2020-12-15T16:05:36  <jonatack> It's also fair to say that, with a few exceptions, new funding principally goes to those with specific project proposals
374 2020-12-15T16:05:47  <jonatack> projects which are, naturally, prioritized by the grantees over reviewing and testing, as they will be evaluated on them
375 2020-12-15T16:05:57  <jonatack> If then, funding, fame and glory don’t generally go to new people doing review and testing...
376 2020-12-15T16:06:06  <jonatack> it may be fair to say that incentives are not really aligned if it is a bottleneck and we need more of it.
377 2020-12-15T16:06:16  <MarcoFalke> I think review can also be done by new people. Obvioulsy they need more time to reach the same conclusions, but the only precondition is to have a working brain and common sense. It is not like anyone is born with a review badge on your shoulder.
378 2020-12-15T16:06:19  <MarcoFalke> *their
379 2020-12-15T16:06:49  <jonatack> Are review and testing then somewhat altruistic, partly done for swapping favors and keeping promises, and partly done for the greater good?
380 2020-12-15T16:06:54  <jonatack> Is there, like open source software, an element of tragedy of the commons?
381 2020-12-15T16:07:00  <jonatack> If yes to any of the above, I suppose it makes perfect sense if it remains the bottleneck...
382 2020-12-15T16:07:03  <jonatack> ...and a bit like sex: more talk than actually doing it!
383 2020-12-15T16:07:10  <jonatack> fin
384 2020-12-15T16:07:19  <luke-jr> jonatack: one way to make funding help in this area might be to have it based on bug bounties instead ofsimple grants
385 2020-12-15T16:07:34  <ariard> jonatack: agree on the newsworthy thing, bitcoin medias don't talk about a great ongoing review but maybe we should keep educating them?
386 2020-12-15T16:07:41  <luke-jr> eg, reward people for finding concrete bugs in either merged or PR code
387 2020-12-15T16:08:17  *** joelklabo <joelklabo!~textual@108-196-216-127.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
388 2020-12-15T16:08:23  <luke-jr> (this probably has other downsides ofc, like higher overhead)
389 2020-12-15T16:11:40  *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d <da39a3ee5e6b4b0d!~da39a3ee5@2403:6200:8876:cecf:a55b:90cf:1ae1:4d7b> has quit IRC (Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
390 2020-12-15T16:13:03  *** davterra <davterra!~davterra@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
391 2020-12-15T16:15:00  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392 2020-12-15T16:15:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f1f2418433c9...70150824dc2c
393 2020-12-15T16:15:00  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8c09c0c practicalswift: fuzz: Avoid time-based "non-determinism" in fuzzing harnesses by using moc...
394 2020-12-15T16:15:01  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7015082 MarcoFalke: Merge #20437: fuzz: Avoid time-based "non-determinism" in fuzzing harnesse...
395 2020-12-15T16:15:02  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
396 2020-12-15T16:15:20  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
397 2020-12-15T16:15:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #20437: fuzz: Avoid time-based "non-determinism" in fuzzing harnesses by using mocked GetTime() (master...fuzzers-remove-time-based-non-determinism) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20437
398 2020-12-15T16:15:21  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
399 2020-12-15T16:16:47  <jamesob> Hey maintainers, the latest AU PR has 3 solid ACKs. Might be worth a look? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19806
400 2020-12-15T16:18:19  *** joelklabo <joelklabo!~textual@108-196-216-127.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has quit IRC (Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com)
401 2020-12-15T16:32:26  <wumpus> jamesob:will take a look, thanks
402 2020-12-15T16:33:59  <wumpus> jamesob: the commment about avoiding asserts with side effects probably needs to be addressed
403 2020-12-15T16:37:52  *** joelklabo <joelklabo!~textual@108-196-216-127.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
404 2020-12-15T16:38:23  *** palazzovincenzo <palazzovincenzo!~vincent@93-35-218-68.ip56.fastwebnet.it> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
405 2020-12-15T16:38:35  *** vincenzopalazzo <vincenzopalazzo!~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:5809:f8dd:2776:36cd> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
406 2020-12-15T16:39:14  *** jeremyrubin <jeremyrubin!~jr@c-73-15-215-148.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
407 2020-12-15T16:41:01  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
408 2020-12-15T16:41:19  *** provoostenator <provoostenator!~quassel@provoostenator.sprovoost.nl> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
409 2020-12-15T16:41:25  <jamesob> wumpus: cool, willfix
410 2020-12-15T16:42:32  *** provoostenator <provoostenator!~quassel@provoostenator.sprovoost.nl> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
411 2020-12-15T16:43:47  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
412 2020-12-15T16:47:11  *** joelklabo <joelklabo!~textual@108-196-216-127.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has quit IRC (Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com)
413 2020-12-15T16:53:16  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
414 2020-12-15T16:53:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/70150824dc2c...ec6149c01e6d
415 2020-12-15T16:53:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f7264ff Lucas Ontivero: Check if Cjdns address is valid
416 2020-12-15T16:53:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ec6149c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20616: Check CJDNS address is valid
417 2020-12-15T16:53:24  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
418 2020-12-15T16:53:41  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
419 2020-12-15T16:53:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20616: Check CJDNS address is valid (master...validate-cjdns-addresses) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20616
420 2020-12-15T16:53:42  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
421 2020-12-15T16:55:39  <andytoshi> jnewbery: oh, good idea about just waiting on listunspent (or even getbalance)
422 2020-12-15T16:57:04  <jnewbery> I was originally going to suggest getbalance, but I thought listunspent would allow you to wait for the exact block, and you might not know exactly what balance you're waiting for
423 2020-12-15T16:57:24  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
424 2020-12-15T16:57:25  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #20525: Init script for debian/ubuntu (master...patch-2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20525
425 2020-12-15T16:57:25  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
426 2020-12-15T16:58:14  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
427 2020-12-15T16:58:41  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
428 2020-12-15T16:59:09  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
429 2020-12-15T16:59:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ec6149c01e6d...a35a3466efd1
430 2020-12-15T16:59:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa86217 MarcoFalke: doc: Move add relay comment in net to correct place
431 2020-12-15T16:59:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a35a346 MarcoFalke: Merge #20653: doc: Move addr relay comment in net to correct place
432 2020-12-15T16:59:14  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
433 2020-12-15T16:59:31  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
434 2020-12-15T16:59:31  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #20653: doc: Move addr relay comment in net to correct place (master...2012-docNetAddrRelay) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20653
435 2020-12-15T16:59:32  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
436 2020-12-15T17:08:38  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
437 2020-12-15T17:08:38  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #20661: Only relay torv3 addresses to addrv2-capable peers (master...202012_torv2_relay_only_addrv2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20661
438 2020-12-15T17:08:38  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
439 2020-12-15T17:08:39  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
440 2020-12-15T17:09:39  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
441 2020-12-15T17:25:00  *** joelklabo <joelklabo!~textual@108-196-216-127.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
442 2020-12-15T17:29:48  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
443 2020-12-15T17:39:23  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
444 2020-12-15T17:39:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] lontivero opened pull request #20662: Allow setting I2P addresses (master...set-i2p) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20662
445 2020-12-15T17:39:24  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
446 2020-12-15T17:40:34  *** eagless <eagless!~eagless@nova-153-092-149-207.cpe.nova.is> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
447 2020-12-15T17:45:31  *** guest534543 <guest534543!~mix@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
448 2020-12-15T17:48:49  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
449 2020-12-15T17:50:26  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
450 2020-12-15T17:51:25  *** az0re <az0re!~az0re@gateway/tor-sasl/az0re> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
451 2020-12-15T17:53:16  *** guest534543 <guest534543!~mix@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
452 2020-12-15T18:00:33  *** jb55 <jb55!~jb55@gateway/tor-sasl/jb55> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
453 2020-12-15T18:03:29  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
454 2020-12-15T18:03:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a35a3466efd1...8bb40d5f56c8
455 2020-12-15T18:03:30  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 44444ba MarcoFalke: fuzz: Link all targets once
456 2020-12-15T18:03:31  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa13e1b MarcoFalke: build: Add option --enable-danger-fuzz-link-all
457 2020-12-15T18:03:31  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8bb40d5 MarcoFalke: Merge #20560: fuzz: Link all targets once
458 2020-12-15T18:03:33  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
459 2020-12-15T18:03:40  <jonatack> luke-jr: sure, istm grants are essential, and donations and bounties might be complementary (if they can surmount the overhead) but probably aren't enough on their own for what needs to be done and for developer sustainability.
460 2020-12-15T18:03:49  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
461 2020-12-15T18:03:49  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #20560: fuzz: Link all targets once (master...2012-fuzzLinkOnce) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20560
462 2020-12-15T18:03:50  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
463 2020-12-15T18:06:49  *** davterra <davterra!~davterra@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
464 2020-12-15T18:07:10  <luke-jr> jonatack: istm?
465 2020-12-15T18:07:26  <wumpus> provoostenator: i'm still not able to connect to your onionv3 signet seed :/
466 2020-12-15T18:08:08  <wumpus> nice, back to one fuzz target
467 2020-12-15T18:08:36  <jonatack> luke-jr: "it seems to me"
468 2020-12-15T18:09:04  <jonatack> luke-jr: heh yes, it could have been read as a type of grant
469 2020-12-15T18:09:34  <luke-jr> jonatack: depends on what the bug bounty amounts are, but sure
470 2020-12-15T18:21:04  *** spake <spake!~spake@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
471 2020-12-15T18:21:06  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472 2020-12-15T18:21:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #20663: fuzz: Leave script_assets_test_minimizer unregistered (master...2012-fuzzNoReg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20663
473 2020-12-15T18:21:06  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
474 2020-12-15T18:21:12  *** sgeisler <sgeisler!sid356034@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-lsbztgetyjllqsza> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
475 2020-12-15T18:24:42  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
476 2020-12-15T18:24:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] lontivero closed pull request #20662: Allow setting I2P addresses (master...set-i2p) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20662
477 2020-12-15T18:24:43  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
478 2020-12-15T18:29:36  *** lightlike <lightlike!~lightlike@p200300c7ef22170074211917a47a8485.dip0.t-ipconnect.de> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
479 2020-12-15T18:33:45  *** belcher_ is now known as belcher
480 2020-12-15T18:39:01  *** alex66 <alex66!ae3b1d20@c-174-59-29-32.hsd1.pa.comcast.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
481 2020-12-15T18:39:39  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482 2020-12-15T18:39:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] lontivero reopened pull request #20662: Allow setting I2P addresses (master...set-i2p) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20662
483 2020-12-15T18:39:40  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
484 2020-12-15T18:43:58  *** alex66 <alex66!ae3b1d20@c-174-59-29-32.hsd1.pa.comcast.net> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
485 2020-12-15T18:45:13  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has quit IRC (Quit: Pavlenex)
486 2020-12-15T19:02:18  *** davterra <davterra!~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
487 2020-12-15T19:02:36  *** yanmaani <yanmaani!~yanmaani@gateway/tor-sasl/yanmaani> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
488 2020-12-15T19:03:13  *** yanmaani <yanmaani!~yanmaani@gateway/tor-sasl/yanmaani> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
489 2020-12-15T19:06:59  <belcher> where did the github-merge.py script go? is there an alternative used now
490 2020-12-15T19:07:50  <harding> belcher: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-maintainer-tools/blob/master/github-merge.py it just changes repos
491 2020-12-15T19:07:58  <belcher> ty
492 2020-12-15T19:08:01  <harding> changed *
493 2020-12-15T19:08:06  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
494 2020-12-15T19:09:57  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
495 2020-12-15T19:10:20  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
496 2020-12-15T19:11:53  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
497 2020-12-15T19:17:44  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
498 2020-12-15T19:21:25  *** tryphe_ <tryphe_!~tryphe@unaffiliated/tryphe> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
499 2020-12-15T19:21:26  *** tryphe <tryphe!~tryphe@unaffiliated/tryphe> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
500 2020-12-15T19:27:46  *** jeremyb <jeremyb!~jeremyb@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
501 2020-12-15T19:30:21  <wumpus> yep
502 2020-12-15T19:37:32  *** guaj0 <guaj0!~guaj0@231.red-95-120-196.dynamicip.rima-tde.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
503 2020-12-15T19:40:57  *** dviola <dviola!~diego@unaffiliated/dviola> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
504 2020-12-15T19:41:14  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
505 2020-12-15T19:41:14  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #20664: Add scanblockfilters RPC call (master...2020/12/filterblocks_rpc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20664
506 2020-12-15T19:41:26  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
507 2020-12-15T19:44:40  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
508 2020-12-15T19:44:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] gruve-p opened pull request #20665: Build: update clang patch url and hash (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20665
509 2020-12-15T19:44:41  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
510 2020-12-15T19:46:03  <dhruvm> CI re-run please? https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5858449189765120
511 2020-12-15T19:47:47  <sipa> dhruvm: done
512 2020-12-15T19:53:43  *** yanmaani <yanmaani!~yanmaani@gateway/tor-sasl/yanmaani> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
513 2020-12-15T19:54:16  *** yanmaani <yanmaani!~yanmaani@gateway/tor-sasl/yanmaani> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
514 2020-12-15T20:00:13  *** justanotheruser <justanotheruser!~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
515 2020-12-15T20:02:09  <dhruvm> 🙏🙏🏽
516 2020-12-15T20:02:10  *** joelklabo <joelklabo!~textual@108-196-216-127.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has quit IRC (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
517 2020-12-15T20:03:30  <provoostenator> wumpus: it's the same machine that I use for DNS seed crawling. Perhaps its incessant hammering of the Tor network is causing the flakiness.
518 2020-12-15T20:03:43  <provoostenator> I might move the Signet seed node elsewhere.
519 2020-12-15T20:05:18  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
520 2020-12-15T20:07:32  <provoostenator> Indeed curling the blockstream explorer v3 URL is also unresponsive.
521 2020-12-15T20:07:39  <provoostenator> (from that machine)
522 2020-12-15T20:08:19  *** guaj0 <guaj0!~guaj0@231.red-95-120-196.dynamicip.rima-tde.net> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
523 2020-12-15T20:12:18  <dhruvm> jonatack: Your comment about grant-seekers prioritizing projects over testing/review sounds right. One potential way to affect change: Core devs could get together and let it be known that they will give letters of recommendation for grant committees and will overweight review and testing.
524 2020-12-15T20:18:14  *** Eagle[TM] <Eagle[TM]!~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
525 2020-12-15T20:20:38  *** provoostenator <provoostenator!~quassel@provoostenator.sprovoost.nl> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
526 2020-12-15T20:20:51  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
527 2020-12-15T20:21:25  *** EagleTM <EagleTM!~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
528 2020-12-15T20:21:50  *** provoostenator <provoostenator!~quassel@provoostenator.sprovoost.nl> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
529 2020-12-15T20:22:09  *** justanotheruser <justanotheruser!~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
530 2020-12-15T20:31:54  <wumpus> provoostenator: i've seen this problem as well with more or less busy tor services, usually restarting the daemon works, at least for a while
531 2020-12-15T20:32:13  <provoostenator> I just moved it to a different machine,  it should be reachable now
532 2020-12-15T20:32:19  <wumpus> oh it succeeds now !
533 2020-12-15T20:33:45  <provoostenator> Hopefully it stays that way.  This new machine doesn't do antying tor-intensive.
534 2020-12-15T20:39:20  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
535 2020-12-15T20:39:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8bb40d5f56c8...d9a4738c9d3d
536 2020-12-15T20:39:21  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3e6657a Sjors Provoost: Move signet onion seed from v2 to v3
537 2020-12-15T20:39:21  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d9a4738 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20660: Move signet onion seed from v2 to v3
538 2020-12-15T20:39:32  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
539 2020-12-15T20:39:45  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
540 2020-12-15T20:39:45  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20660: Move signet onion seed from v2 to v3 (master...2020/12/signet-v3-onion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20660
541 2020-12-15T20:39:56  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
542 2020-12-15T20:43:55  *** justanotheruser <justanotheruser!~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
543 2020-12-15T20:45:26  <wumpus> one less v2 onion in the source code :)
544 2020-12-15T20:46:09  <sipa> peeling them off, one by one
545 2020-12-15T20:46:42  <wumpus> yess
546 2020-12-15T20:50:23  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
547 2020-12-15T20:50:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d9a4738c9d3d...c434e2cca918
548 2020-12-15T20:50:23  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master faf2c6e MarcoFalke: cirrus: Schedule one task with paid credits for faster CI feedback
549 2020-12-15T20:50:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c434e2c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20615: cirrus: Schedule one task with paid credits for faster CI fe...
550 2020-12-15T20:50:25  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
551 2020-12-15T20:50:37  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552 2020-12-15T20:50:38  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20615: cirrus: Schedule one task with paid credits for faster CI feedback (master...2012-ciFasterFeedback) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20615
553 2020-12-15T20:50:39  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
554 2020-12-15T20:53:00  *** Pavlenex <Pavlenex!~Thunderbi@> has quit IRC (Quit: Pavlenex)
555 2020-12-15T20:56:40  *** lontivero <lontivero!~lontivero@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
556 2020-12-15T20:56:41  *** az0re <az0re!~az0re@gateway/tor-sasl/az0re> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
557 2020-12-15T21:00:17  *** proofofkeags <proofofkeags!~proofofke@174-16-212-53.hlrn.qwest.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
558 2020-12-15T21:05:59  <jonatack> dhruvm: sure, sgtm. partly i reckon that even when grantors eyes don't glaze over at the importance of review & testing (and understanding of that does indeed seem to be improving from what I hear), evaluating grantee performance on that remains a challenge for them as they have to rely on peer feedback. It might be a bit easier for them to evaluate the delivery of a specific project, and
559 2020-12-15T21:06:01  <jonatack> to sell/market it internally to stakeholders to justify continued open source grant funding.
560 2020-12-15T21:12:09  <jonatack> dhruvm: that said, it's only speculation on my part. my grantor specifically asked that i keep reviewing if supported--they get it.
561 2020-12-15T21:14:23  <wumpus> even if the eventual goal is do deliver a project, reviewing other people's changes (especially to the part of the code which is their interest) will likely make them a better contributor in the first place
562 2020-12-15T21:14:38  <jonatack> yess
563 2020-12-15T21:16:57  *** joelklabo <joelklabo!~textual@108-196-216-127.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
564 2020-12-15T21:33:26  <dhruvm> yeah - so the core of the issue is that it's hard for the grantors to evaluate performance. that is something core devs can develop a system around?
565 2020-12-15T21:34:55  <dhruvm> kinda like peer performance reviews at companies
566 2020-12-15T21:35:55  <dhruvm> they face similar challenges with hiring for example. engineers don't like interviewing but it is crucial in a fast growth situation.
567 2020-12-15T21:36:42  *** davterra <davterra!~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
568 2020-12-15T21:38:00  <dhruvm> i've had jobs where contribution to hiring was as important as new launches for those reviews
569 2020-12-15T21:38:43  *** Chris_Stewart_5 <Chris_Stewart_5!~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
570 2020-12-15T21:41:49  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
571 2020-12-15T21:44:12  <jonatack> dhruvm: hiring: yes, in my previous life i sometimes brought the dev team for the 6-12 month long projects, every project was like a band reunion
572 2020-12-15T21:45:04  *** miketwen_ <miketwen_!~miketwent@ec2-3-216-176-187.compute-1.amazonaws.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
573 2020-12-15T21:45:09  <jonatack> dhruvm: evaluation does seem to be a key issue, and there are some initiatives afoot to work on this
574 2020-12-15T21:47:06  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~mix@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
575 2020-12-15T21:47:24  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
576 2020-12-15T21:47:25  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c434e2cca918...dff0f6f753ea
577 2020-12-15T21:47:26  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fade619 MarcoFalke: Move TX_MAX_STANDARD_VERSION to policy
578 2020-12-15T21:47:26  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master dff0f6f Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20611: Move TX_MAX_STANDARD_VERSION to policy
579 2020-12-15T21:47:28  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
580 2020-12-15T21:47:44  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
581 2020-12-15T21:47:45  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20611: Move TX_MAX_STANDARD_VERSION to policy (master...2012-mvTxStandardVersion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20611
582 2020-12-15T21:47:45  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
583 2020-12-15T21:51:19  *** guaj0 <guaj0!~guaj0@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
584 2020-12-15T21:57:22  *** Emcy <Emcy!~Emcy@unaffiliated/emcy> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
585 2020-12-15T21:58:18  *** Emcy <Emcy!~Emcy@unaffiliated/emcy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
586 2020-12-15T21:58:40  *** peterrizzo_ <peterrizzo_!~peterrizz@ool-44c18924.dyn.optonline.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
587 2020-12-15T22:17:48  *** miketwen_ <miketwen_!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
588 2020-12-15T22:18:37  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jon@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
589 2020-12-15T22:19:02  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jon@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
590 2020-12-15T22:21:05  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
591 2020-12-15T22:23:16  *** miketwen_ <miketwen_!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
592 2020-12-15T22:23:41  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
593 2020-12-15T22:23:41  <bitcoin-git> [gui] luke-jr opened pull request #153: GUI: Define MAX_DIGITS_BTC for magic number in BitcoinUnits::format (master...const_max_digits) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/153
594 2020-12-15T22:23:42  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
595 2020-12-15T22:25:20  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
596 2020-12-15T22:32:47  *** guaj0 <guaj0!~guaj0@> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
597 2020-12-15T22:45:13  *** flag <flag!~flag@net-93-66-71-105.cust.vodafonedsl.it> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
598 2020-12-15T22:46:23  *** rex4539 <rex4539!~rex4539@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
599 2020-12-15T22:48:05  *** miketwenty1 <miketwenty1!~miketwent@> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
600 2020-12-15T22:48:11  *** miketwen_ <miketwen_!~miketwent@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
601 2020-12-15T22:50:29  *** rex4539 <rex4539!~rex4539@> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
602 2020-12-15T22:52:51  *** davterra <davterra!~davterra@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
603 2020-12-15T22:56:31  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has quit IRC (Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com))
604 2020-12-15T22:57:08  *** flag <flag!~flag@net-93-66-71-105.cust.vodafonedsl.it> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
605 2020-12-15T22:58:10  *** guaj0 <guaj0!~guaj0@231.red-95-120-196.dynamicip.rima-tde.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
606 2020-12-15T23:01:35  *** guaj0 <guaj0!~guaj0@231.red-95-120-196.dynamicip.rima-tde.net> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
607 2020-12-15T23:28:02  *** Asbestos_Vapor <Asbestos_Vapor!~Mercury_V@174-082-166-092.res.spectrum.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
608 2020-12-15T23:39:06  *** instagibbs <instagibbs!~greg@061093103011.ctinets.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
609 2020-12-15T23:44:15  <instagibbs> apologies if this gets double-posted, my irc setup being wonky: I can say from a bit of experience in the "grant business" that there is a lot of pressure(rightly so) to not influence "what" a person is working on, and that "inability to evaluate a reviewer" has not been a reason to deny grants(IIRC no one actually applied where their top line was "review"). in other words, if someone wants to get a grant to do review, they have to
610 2020-12-15T23:44:15  <instagibbs> submit an application :)
611 2020-12-15T23:44:49  <instagibbs> if we have a dearth of review because of *funding* this is fixable. I suspect not.
612 2020-12-15T23:45:51  <instagibbs> s/fixable/easily fixable/
613 2020-12-15T23:46:01  <luke-jr> instagibbs: …
614 2020-12-15T23:46:29  <instagibbs> luke-jr, !!!
615 2020-12-15T23:46:56  <luke-jr> instagibbs: well, it might not add review, but it could keep from losing my reviewing if I got funding <.<
616 2020-12-15T23:47:46  <luke-jr> I hate saying it like that, but I can't keep doing this unfunded forever XD
617 2020-12-15T23:47:55  <instagibbs> (Can only speak to the one grant program I'm involved in)
618 2020-12-15T23:48:35  <instagibbs> I suspect in general it's "we need to motivate coders to become reviewers" and "we need new contributors"
619 2020-12-15T23:49:07  <instagibbs> Also, people can still bug me for review, I'm not on IRC much anymore(life stuff) but if you bug me via email I will likely do it :)
620 2020-12-15T23:49:10  <luke-jr> yes, I suspect that's part of it
621 2020-12-15T23:50:03  *** vasild <vasild!~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
622 2020-12-15T23:56:02  *** palazzovincenzo <palazzovincenzo!~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:5809:f8dd:2776:36cd> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
623 2020-12-15T23:56:52  *** vincenzopalazzo <vincenzopalazzo!~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:5809:f8dd:2776:36cd> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
624 2020-12-15T23:58:50  *** vincenzopalazzo <vincenzopalazzo!~vincent@93-35-218-68.ip56.fastwebnet.it> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev