1 2021-07-01T00:21:11  *** belcher_ <belcher_!~belcher@user/belcher> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  2 2021-07-01T00:24:18  *** belcher <belcher!~belcher@user/belcher> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
  3 2021-07-01T00:25:08  *** roconnor_ <roconnor_!~roconnor@host-45-58-213-173.dyn.295.ca> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2021-07-01T00:25:44  *** roconnor <roconnor!~roconnor@host-45-58-197-229.dyn.295.ca> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
  5 2021-07-01T00:27:09  *** roconnor_ is now known as roconnor
  6 2021-07-01T00:56:53  *** ratelius <ratelius!ratelius@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/ratelius> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
  7 2021-07-01T01:09:41  *** ratelius <ratelius!ratelius@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/ratelius> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  8 2021-07-01T01:27:33  *** roconnor <roconnor!~roconnor@host-45-58-213-173.dyn.295.ca> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
  9 2021-07-01T01:49:15  *** hex17or <hex17or!~hex17or@gateway/tor-sasl/hex17or> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 10 2021-07-01T01:50:06  *** hex17or <hex17or!~hex17or@gateway/tor-sasl/hex17or> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2021-07-01T02:09:33  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2021-07-01T02:20:38  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2021-07-01T02:40:25  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 14 2021-07-01T02:56:28  *** earnestly <earnestly!~earnest@user/earnestly> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 15 2021-07-01T03:10:55  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2021-07-01T03:11:36  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 17 2021-07-01T03:15:30  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 18 2021-07-01T03:18:40  *** upekkha is now known as metta
 19 2021-07-01T03:21:09  *** jtrag <jtrag!~jtrag@c-71-207-125-151.hsd1.pa.comcast.net> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 20 2021-07-01T03:29:18  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2021-07-01T03:33:54  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 22 2021-07-01T03:36:43  *** VzxPLnHqr_ <VzxPLnHqr_!VzxPLnHqr@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/vzxplnhqr> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2021-07-01T03:37:29  *** VzxPLnHqr <VzxPLnHqr!VzxPLnHqr@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/vzxplnhqr> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 24 2021-07-01T03:37:30  *** ironsoba <ironsoba!~z@user/ironsoba> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 25 2021-07-01T04:00:46  *** achow101 <achow101!~achow101@user/achow101> has quit IRC (Quit: Bye)
 26 2021-07-01T04:00:56  *** achow101 <achow101!~achow101@user/achow101> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2021-07-01T04:06:23  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 28 2021-07-01T04:10:42  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 29 2021-07-01T04:22:09  *** focus <focus!~focus@109-184-162-4.dynamic.mts-nn.ru> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 30 2021-07-01T04:38:39  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2021-07-01T04:42:42  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 32 2021-07-01T05:13:49  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 33 2021-07-01T05:18:18  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 34 2021-07-01T05:33:00  <fanquake> thanks achow101
 35 2021-07-01T05:54:58  *** kabaum <kabaum!~kabaum@ua-84-216-129-44.bbcust.telenor.se> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 36 2021-07-01T05:58:24  *** deeepfield <deeepfield!~deepfield@066-190-041-167.res.spectrum.com> has left #bitcoin-core-dev (Leaving)
 37 2021-07-01T06:06:08  <laanwj> why 0.21.1, we should be pretty close to 0.21.2
 38 2021-07-01T06:09:03  *** kabaum <kabaum!~kabaum@ua-84-216-129-44.bbcust.telenor.se> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
 39 2021-07-01T06:12:39  *** jinkbs89 is now known as jinkbs
 40 2021-07-01T06:16:11  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~Kiminuo@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2021-07-01T06:19:06  <hebasto> pr bot (opening, closing, merging) still keep silence here; whom to ping?
 42 2021-07-01T06:20:05  <_aj_> it was back earlier
 43 2021-07-01T06:20:16  <_aj_> oh, no that was number to url bot
 44 2021-07-01T06:20:44  <_aj_> hebasto: meeting topic it maybe?
 45 2021-07-01T06:29:17  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 46 2021-07-01T06:31:38  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 47 2021-07-01T06:32:46  *** vasild <vasild!~vd@user/vasild> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 48 2021-07-01T06:38:23  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 49 2021-07-01T06:39:16  *** vasild <vasild!~vd@user/vasild> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2021-07-01T06:42:42  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 51 2021-07-01T07:03:40  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~Kiminuo@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 52 2021-07-01T07:11:02  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~Kiminuo@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 53 2021-07-01T07:21:42  *** belcher_ is now known as belcher
 54 2021-07-01T07:24:28  *** goatpig <goatpig!~goat@h-94-254-2-155.A498.priv.bahnhof.se> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
 55 2021-07-01T07:24:38  <vasild> I am drafting a BIP to resolve the problem with relaying addresses to nodes that just drop them: https://github.com/vasild/bitcoin/wiki/BIP-nounsolicitedaddr, gleb, sdaftuar, amiti
 56 2021-07-01T07:27:30  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 57 2021-07-01T07:31:09  <vasild> That is related to #17194 and #21528
 58 2021-07-01T07:31:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17194 | p2p: Avoid forwarding ADDR messages to SPV nodes by naumenkogs · Pull Request #17194 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 59 2021-07-01T07:31:14  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21528 | [p2p] Reduce addr blackholes by amitiuttarwar · Pull Request #21528 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 60 2021-07-01T07:38:00  *** earnestly <earnestly!~earnest@user/earnestly> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 61 2021-07-01T07:50:20  *** Guest50 <Guest50!~Guest50@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2021-07-01T07:54:46  *** focus <focus!~focus@109-184-162-4.dynamic.mts-nn.ru> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 63 2021-07-01T07:56:17  *** Guest50 <Guest50!~Guest50@> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
 64 2021-07-01T08:02:57  *** goatpig <goatpig!~goat@blocksettle-gw.cust.31173.se> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2021-07-01T08:39:05  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 66 2021-07-01T08:42:18  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 67 2021-07-01T08:43:06  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 68 2021-07-01T08:44:27  *** dongcarl[m] <dongcarl[m]!~dongcarlm@2001:470:69fc:105::82> has quit IRC (Quit: node-irc says goodbye)
 69 2021-07-01T08:48:40  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 70 2021-07-01T08:56:18  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2021-07-01T08:58:49  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~Kiminuo@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 72 2021-07-01T09:02:52  *** kexkey_ <kexkey_!~kexkey@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2021-07-01T09:04:52  *** kexkey <kexkey!~kexkey@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
 74 2021-07-01T09:23:36  *** lkqwejhhgasdjhgn <lkqwejhhgasdjhgn!~kljkljklk@p200300d46f03bc00e8dae3d2b501b2e6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 75 2021-07-01T10:13:15  *** stevenroose <stevenroose!~steven@2001:19f0:6801:83a:a90a:4c55:7940:b7e2> has quit IRC (Quit: ZNC 1.7.4 - https://znc.in)
 76 2021-07-01T10:13:32  *** stevenroose <stevenroose!~steven@irc.roose.io> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2021-07-01T10:14:42  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
 78 2021-07-01T10:14:57  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 79 2021-07-01T10:23:58  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 80 2021-07-01T10:24:22  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2021-07-01T10:28:00  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
 82 2021-07-01T10:39:52  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 83 2021-07-01T10:43:54  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 84 2021-07-01T10:49:13  <laanwj> hebasto: strange, let's see
 85 2021-07-01T10:51:36  *** smartin <smartin!~Icedove@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 86 2021-07-01T10:56:25  *** roconnor <roconnor!~roconnor@host-45-78-206-181.dyn.295.ca> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 87 2021-07-01T10:57:33  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 88 2021-07-01T10:57:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #22379: wallet: erase spkmans rather than setting to nullptr (master...fix-spkman-del) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22379
 89 2021-07-01T10:57:34  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 90 2021-07-01T10:57:40  <laanwj> there it is again
 91 2021-07-01T10:57:56  <hebasto> nice
 92 2021-07-01T10:58:00  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2021-07-01T10:58:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3ef2d400fa42...fa46e489820b
 94 2021-07-01T10:58:00  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b945a31 Andrew Chow: wallet: erase spkmans rather than setting to nullptr
 95 2021-07-01T10:58:00  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa46e48 fanquake: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22379: wallet: erase spkmans rather than setting to ...
 96 2021-07-01T10:58:02  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2021-07-01T11:07:02  <laanwj> looks like a bug in the bot: https://github.com/gkrizek/ghi/issues/13 think i'm going to solve it for now by firewalling just github IPs
 98 2021-07-01T11:08:22  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has quit IRC (Quit: = "")
 99 2021-07-01T11:13:21  *** jinkbs <jinkbs!~jinkbs@240e:3b2:a3f:1820:cd78:5ac8:cdbd:5b0> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
100 2021-07-01T11:14:23  *** jinkbs238 <jinkbs238!~jinkbs2@240e:3b2:a3f:1820:cd78:5ac8:cdbd:5b0> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
101 2021-07-01T11:17:13  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102 2021-07-01T11:19:54  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
103 2021-07-01T11:19:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3ef2d400fa42...fa46e489820b
104 2021-07-01T11:19:54  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b945a31 Andrew Chow: wallet: erase spkmans rather than setting to nullptr
105 2021-07-01T11:19:54  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa46e48 fanquake: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22379: wallet: erase spkmans rather than setting to ...
106 2021-07-01T11:19:56  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2021-07-01T11:20:12  <laanwj> (^^ that was a test, hence the repeated notification)
108 2021-07-01T11:23:03  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
109 2021-07-01T11:23:03  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fa46e489820b...185acdb5e818
110 2021-07-01T11:23:03  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6084d2c S3RK: wallet: do not spam about non-existent spk managers
111 2021-07-01T11:23:03  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 185acdb fanquake: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22334: wallet: do not spam about non-existent spk ma...
112 2021-07-01T11:23:05  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
113 2021-07-01T11:26:33  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2021-07-01T11:26:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #22334: wallet: do not spam about non-existent spk managers (master...stop_non_existing_spkman_spam) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22334
115 2021-07-01T11:26:34  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
116 2021-07-01T11:37:33  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
117 2021-07-01T11:48:28  *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
118 2021-07-01T11:49:07  *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
119 2021-07-01T11:55:28  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has quit IRC (Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com))
120 2021-07-01T12:14:40  *** kabaum <kabaum!~kabaum@ua-84-216-129-44.bbcust.telenor.se> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
121 2021-07-01T12:17:54  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2021-07-01T12:17:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/185acdb5e818...2749613020ed
123 2021-07-01T12:17:54  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 67669ab Hennadii Stepanov: build: Fix Boost Process compatibility with mingw-w64 compiler
124 2021-07-01T12:17:54  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2749613 fanquake: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22348: build: Fix cross build for Windows with Boost...
125 2021-07-01T12:17:56  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2021-07-01T12:18:11  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
127 2021-07-01T12:18:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #22348: build: Fix cross build for Windows with Boost Process  (master...210627-boost) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22348
128 2021-07-01T12:18:12  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
129 2021-07-01T12:23:30  *** jinkbs <jinkbs!~jinkbs@240e:3b2:a3f:1820:fd1c:d1fa:912a:ce89> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
130 2021-07-01T12:32:24  *** jinkbs <jinkbs!~jinkbs@240e:3b2:a3f:1820:fd1c:d1fa:912a:ce89> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
131 2021-07-01T12:35:15  *** neha <neha!~neha@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132 2021-07-01T12:40:00  *** neha <neha!~neha@> has quit IRC (Quit: leaving)
133 2021-07-01T12:40:18  *** neha <neha!~neha@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
134 2021-07-01T12:46:40  *** neha <neha!~neha@> has quit IRC (Quit: leaving)
135 2021-07-01T12:46:58  *** neha <neha!~neha@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
136 2021-07-01T12:47:40  <fanquake> 3/4 of the way through your Guix build is the wrong time to be trying to remember if you checked out the right branch before startitng
137 2021-07-01T13:02:17  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
138 2021-07-01T13:02:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #22381: guix: Test security-check sanity before performing them (with macOS) (master...20980_macOS_fixups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22381
139 2021-07-01T13:02:19  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
140 2021-07-01T13:03:36  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
141 2021-07-01T13:03:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #20980: guix: Test security-check sanity before performing them (master...2020-12-guix-mingw-extra-flags) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20980
142 2021-07-01T13:03:38  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
143 2021-07-01T13:19:22  *** powerjungle <powerjungle!~powerjung@h081217087223.dyn.cm.kabsi.at> has left #bitcoin-core-dev (see ya around)
144 2021-07-01T13:39:25  <laanwj> haha yes
145 2021-07-01T13:43:33  *** kabaum <kabaum!~kabaum@ua-84-216-129-44.bbcust.telenor.se> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
146 2021-07-01T13:46:14  <hebasto> it seems #22381 cannot be fully tested and reviewed before #22365, at least to test the ELF functionality
147 2021-07-01T13:46:15  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22381 | guix: Test security-check sanity before performing them (with macOS) by fanquake · Pull Request #22381 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
148 2021-07-01T13:46:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22365 | guix: Avoid relying on newer symbols by rebasing our cross toolchains on older glibcs by dongcarl · Pull Request #22365 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
149 2021-07-01T13:47:30  <fanquake> You can always just run the tests manually
150 2021-07-01T13:47:41  <hebasto> right
151 2021-07-01T13:49:02  <fanquake> The important changes there are for Win and macOS
152 2021-07-01T13:49:40  <fanquake> Also, the other changes will mostly be dropped when we move to testing the ELF binaries with LIEF
153 2021-07-01T13:50:52  <hebasto> we won't move to LIEF for ELF binaries for 22.0 release, right?
154 2021-07-01T13:51:29  <laanwj> i don't think so
155 2021-07-01T13:51:40  <fanquake> It's not a requirement, but I could put the changes together tomorrow if you want to see them
156 2021-07-01T13:52:01  <fanquake> I wont be around for the meeting, but I assume branch off will discussed, and I think we are in pretty good shape.
157 2021-07-01T13:52:04  <laanwj> i'm not sure what would be the advantage of switching that last minute
158 2021-07-01T13:52:16  <fanquake> 22365 + 22381 will just about round out the Guix changes. With some docs in #21711.
159 2021-07-01T13:52:18  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21711 | guix: Add full installation and usage documentation by dongcarl · Pull Request #21711 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
160 2021-07-01T13:52:28  <fanquake> I think a Guix only release is the way to go.
161 2021-07-01T13:52:44  <laanwj> I think so too
162 2021-07-01T13:52:46  <fanquake> There's not much else left in the milestone other than that
163 2021-07-01T13:53:17  <laanwj> what about #19438
164 2021-07-01T13:53:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19438 | Introduce deploymentstatus by ajtowns · Pull Request #19438 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
165 2021-07-01T13:53:36  <laanwj> in my idea that was holding things up
166 2021-07-01T13:54:32  <fanquake> It looks like there could be benefits to getting that in pre branch-off
167 2021-07-01T13:55:16  <laanwj> definitely
168 2021-07-01T13:58:17  <fanquake> It's not clear to me if #20234 is a requirement, but it has some ACKs, albeit one recent comment re the behaviour change
169 2021-07-01T13:58:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20234 | net: dont extra bind for Tor if binds are restricted by vasild · Pull Request #20234 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
170 2021-07-01T14:00:26  <laanwj> i see, if people concept-disagree with it it's better to bump it from the milestone
171 2021-07-01T14:00:55  <laanwj> don't think it is critical to make it into 22.0
172 2021-07-01T14:02:42  *** roconnor <roconnor!~roconnor@host-45-78-206-181.dyn.295.ca> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
173 2021-07-01T14:02:50  <fanquake> If anyone thinks anything has been missed they should also make a point to call it out in the meeting
174 2021-07-01T14:11:08  <jonatack> a choice should probably made between the I2P options outlined in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21389#issuecomment-866925116 (a non-choice would also be a choice, but worth mentioning it)
175 2021-07-01T14:14:27  <jonatack> (not to hold up rc1 but before -final)
176 2021-07-01T14:15:18  <laanwj> I think I prefer #22112
177 2021-07-01T14:15:21  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22112 | Force port 0 in I2P by vasild · Pull Request #22112 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
178 2021-07-01T14:16:47  <laanwj> but good point on needing a solution to that
179 2021-07-01T14:18:08  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
180 2021-07-01T14:18:08  <bitcoin-git> [gui] hebasto opened pull request #377: Translations update (master...210701-tr) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/377
181 2021-07-01T14:18:09  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
182 2021-07-01T14:18:58  <hebasto> laanwj: ^ I've noted FF is checked in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20851 since yesterday
183 2021-07-01T14:20:08  <laanwj> hebasto: yes, it doesn't seem any new features have been added to the milestone for some time so I thought it was about time
184 2021-07-01T14:23:47  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
185 2021-07-01T14:23:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jlopp opened pull request #22383: prefer to use txindex if available for GetTransaction (master...GetTransactionPerformance) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22383
186 2021-07-01T14:23:48  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
187 2021-07-01T14:23:53  <laanwj> bugfixes can still go in, and besides, we're not ready to branch off yet as things are still tagged 22.0 that need to make it in
188 2021-07-01T14:28:22  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
189 2021-07-01T14:34:13  *** jtrag <jtrag!~jtrag@c-71-207-125-151.hsd1.pa.comcast.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
190 2021-07-01T14:37:06  <jonatack> laanwj: yes, vasild and i have been discussing the merits of each offline, 22112 seems best given that SAM 3.2 and up will default ports to 0 and begin portful routing in 3.3 iiuc, but it had some addrman and connection issues to sort out that may have been addressed today. will review again and retest
191 2021-07-01T14:37:53  <laanwj> jonatack: thanks, I'll start testing it too
192 2021-07-01T14:39:09  <vasild> btw, to be clear - the last commit from 22112 is kind of optional - it is only to convert the addrmans of early users who run un-relased bitcoin core
193 2021-07-01T14:40:48  <vasild> as such I think it can/should be reverted eventually at some time in the future, when people have stopped using post-i2p and pre-22112 code
194 2021-07-01T14:40:48  <jonatack> the two issues were that (a) I2P addrman entries were removed due to bucket repositioning with the resetting of those entries' ports to 0 (i went from 15 I2P in my addrman to 5) but the new version preserves them and removes the "other" entry instead
195 2021-07-01T14:41:05  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2021-07-01T14:41:05  <bitcoin-git> [gui] hebasto merged pull request #377: Translations update (master...210701-tr) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/377
197 2021-07-01T14:41:06  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
198 2021-07-01T14:41:24  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
199 2021-07-01T14:41:24  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/2749613020ed...091d35c70e88
200 2021-07-01T14:41:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c7f74f1 Hennadii Stepanov: Translations update
201 2021-07-01T14:41:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 091d35c Hennadii Stepanov: Merge bitcoin-core/gui#377: Translations update
202 2021-07-01T14:41:26  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
203 2021-07-01T14:42:09  <jonatack> and (b) we realized that addnode of I2P peers without a port specified would not establish an outbound connection. the latest push intends to fix that as well.
204 2021-07-01T14:42:26  <jonatack> so two things to test :)
205 2021-07-01T14:58:14  *** goatpig <goatpig!~goat@blocksettle-gw.cust.31173.se> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
206 2021-07-01T15:09:44  <sdaftuar> vasild: thanks for thinking about this addr relay issue. i'm supportive of work towards documenting and coordinating how we want addr relay to work on the network, but i tend to think it's premature to add a new protocol message until we've done a bit more work on how we want addr relay to work for different kinds of network addresses and what kind of propagation model we want to aim for
207 2021-07-01T15:11:08  <sdaftuar> with respect to your proposed "no-unsolicited-addrs" message, i think it would likely be deprecated in the future in favor of a message that negotiated which types of network addresses (ipv4, ipv6, tor, i2p, ...) a peer is interested in specifically?
208 2021-07-01T15:12:25  <sdaftuar> but even now we don't have a good model, or agreed upon set of goals, for how we want addrs to propagate.  for instance one question i have is to what extent it makes sense for nodes that don't understand, say, i2p addresses to be participating in i2p address relay at all.
209 2021-07-01T15:12:48  <sdaftuar> or, what fraction of the network should receive any given announced address, over some time period
210 2021-07-01T15:13:07  <vasild> hmm
211 2021-07-01T15:13:12  <jonatack> interesting questions
212 2021-07-01T15:13:30  <sdaftuar> those kinds of questions make it hard in my mind to ask the network to adopt an addr relay protocol right now. if we're going to ask software to coordinate on this area, we should first have an idea of what we're aiming for
213 2021-07-01T15:14:06  <vasild> I agree
214 2021-07-01T15:14:55  <vasild> "be deprecated in the future in favor of a message that negotiated which types of network addresses (ipv4, ipv6, tor, i2p, ...) a peer is interested in specifically?" -- do you mean unsolicited or regardless?
215 2021-07-01T15:15:54  <sdaftuar> could be either; i could imagine that we need to negotiate behavior both around getaddr/getaddr-responses as well as unsolicited relay
216 2021-07-01T15:16:03  <jonatack> it does seems that adding networks has introduced changes, effects and interactions that we're probably still mostly on the cusp of
217 2021-07-01T15:16:36  <jonatack> and addr relay was already fertile ground for more research
218 2021-07-01T15:17:21  <vasild> So would a message like the following deprecate "no-unsolicited-addrs": "I want only ipv6,tor addresses as a response to getaddr and/or unsolicited"...
219 2021-07-01T15:18:35  <earnestly> (Can solicitation divulge information in such a way that is useful for attacking anonimity?)
220 2021-07-01T15:18:56  <vasild> I don't think the latter supersedes "no-unsolicited-addrs". solicited-or-not is one thing, the type of addresses is another, no?
221 2021-07-01T15:19:38  <sdaftuar> vasild: i could imagine that we'd provide some kind of score for how we treat relay of different address types, akin to how we currently have different relay policies for networks we understand and networks we don't
222 2021-07-01T15:19:53  <sdaftuar> it's possible it own't evolve that way of course, i just htink we don't know yet
223 2021-07-01T15:21:59  *** Guyver2_ <Guyver2_!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2021-07-01T15:23:50  <vasild> earnestly: I think, in theory mostly, one can observe that a given ipv4 node relays readily i2p addresses but does not relay tor addresses. So one may be able to deduct that that node has i2p connectivity and not tor connectivity...
225 2021-07-01T15:24:18  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
226 2021-07-01T15:24:19  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
227 2021-07-01T15:24:25  <vasild> s/does not relay tor addresses/relays tor addresses less readily/
228 2021-07-01T15:26:17  <vasild> earnestly: even if I can tell your ipv4 node has i2p connectivity and does not have tor connectivity, what harm could I do?
229 2021-07-01T15:26:18  <earnestly> vasild: It only came to mind due to that old paper about vulnerabilities in using tor with that autoban system
230 2021-07-01T15:27:08  <vasild> I have not read that one
231 2021-07-01T15:27:45  <vasild> it is cheap to generate tor addresses, I guess if one gets banned he can create a new address easily and persist misbehaving
232 2021-07-01T15:28:09  <earnestly> vasild: https://arxiv.org/abs/1410.6079 (2015)
233 2021-07-01T15:30:25  <vasild> "A low-resource attacker can gain full control of information flows between all users who chose to use Bitcoin over Tor" :-O
234 2021-07-01T15:35:08  <vasild> sdaftuar: "to what extent it makes sense for nodes that don't understand, say, i2p addresses to be participating in i2p address relay at all" -- https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0155.mediawiki contains this sentence: "Clients are RECOMMENDED to gossip addresses from all known networks even if they are currently not connected to some of them. That could help multi-homed nodes and
235 2021-07-01T15:35:14  <vasild> make it more difficult for an observer to tell which networks a node is connected to.", I think that makes sense.
236 2021-07-01T15:38:52  <vasild> sdaftuar: "what fraction of the network should receive any given announced address, over some time period" -- some simulations are at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21528#issuecomment-865658016, I guess a good starting point for that.
237 2021-07-01T15:43:37  <vasild> Do we want as many as possible nodes to receive an announced address as soon as possible? (if we could do that without causing flood/excessive traffic)
238 2021-07-01T15:58:59  *** lkqwejhhgasdjhgn <lkqwejhhgasdjhgn!~kljkljklk@p200300d46f03bc00e8dae3d2b501b2e6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
239 2021-07-01T16:37:36  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
240 2021-07-01T16:37:36  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/091d35c70e88...a926d6dfd291
241 2021-07-01T16:37:36  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c4ddee6 Antoine Riard: test: Add test for replacement relay fee check
242 2021-07-01T16:37:36  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a926d6d MarcoFalke: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22310: test: Add functional test for replacement rel...
243 2021-07-01T16:37:38  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
244 2021-07-01T16:37:52  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2021-07-01T16:37:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #22310: test: Add functional test for replacement relay fee check  (master...2021-06-add-rbf5-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22310
246 2021-07-01T16:37:53  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
247 2021-07-01T16:42:36  *** lightlike <lightlike!~lightlike@user/lightlike> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
248 2021-07-01T16:58:56  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
249 2021-07-01T17:03:27  *** Talkless <Talkless!~Talkless@mail.dargis.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
250 2021-07-01T17:13:28  *** kabaum <kabaum!~kabaum@ua-84-216-129-44.bbcust.telenor.se> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
251 2021-07-01T17:16:35  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252 2021-07-01T17:16:35  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 13 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a926d6dfd291...ddc6979b8baa
253 2021-07-01T17:16:35  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 36a4ba0 Anthony Towns: versionbits: correct doxygen comments
254 2021-07-01T17:16:35  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master eccd736 Anthony Towns: versionbits: Use dedicated lock instead of cs_main
255 2021-07-01T17:16:35  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2b0d291 Anthony Towns: [refactor] Add deploymentstatus.h
256 2021-07-01T17:16:37  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
257 2021-07-01T17:16:52  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2021-07-01T17:16:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #19438: Introduce deploymentstatus (master...202007-deployment-refactor) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19438
259 2021-07-01T17:16:53  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
260 2021-07-01T17:19:37  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
261 2021-07-01T17:33:07  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~Kiminuo@> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262 2021-07-01T18:01:26  <hebasto> meeting?
263 2021-07-01T18:01:56  <hebasto> or missed an hour
264 2021-07-01T18:02:30  <laanwj> date -u shows there's still an hour to go
265 2021-07-01T18:02:40  <sipa> indeed
266 2021-07-01T18:02:43  <hebasto> yeap
267 2021-07-01T18:09:01  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
268 2021-07-01T18:09:02  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #22385: refactor: Use DeploymentEnabled to hide VB deployments (master...2107-dep) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22385
269 2021-07-01T18:09:03  *** bitcoin-git <bitcoin-git!~bitcoin-g@x0f.org> has left #bitcoin-core-dev
270 2021-07-01T18:39:44  *** kabaum <kabaum!~kabaum@ua-84-216-129-44.bbcust.telenor.se> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
271 2021-07-01T18:39:54  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
272 2021-07-01T18:40:31  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
273 2021-07-01T18:48:41  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
274 2021-07-01T18:53:24  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
275 2021-07-01T19:00:11  <laanwj> #startmeeting
276 2021-07-01T19:00:12  <core-meetingbot> Meeting started Thu Jul  1 19:00:11 2021 UTC.  The chair is laanwj. Information about MeetBot at https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings.
277 2021-07-01T19:00:12  <core-meetingbot> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
278 2021-07-01T19:00:35  <hebasto> hi
279 2021-07-01T19:00:45  <laanwj> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: achow101 _aj_ amiti ariard BlueMatt cfields Chris_Stewart_5 darosior digi_james dongcarl elichai2 emilengler fanquake fjahr gleb glozow gmaxwell gwillen hebasto instagibbs jamesob jarolrod jb55 jeremyrubin jl2012 jnewbery jonasschnelli jonatack jtimon kallewoof kanzure kvaciral laanwj lightlike luke-jr maaku marcofalke meshcollider michagogo moneyball morcos
280 2021-07-01T19:00:46  <laanwj> nehan NicolasDorier paveljanik petertodd phantomcircuit promag provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar sipa vasild
281 2021-07-01T19:00:54  <jarolrod> hi
282 2021-07-01T19:01:08  <ajonas> Hi
283 2021-07-01T19:01:19  <ariard> hi
284 2021-07-01T19:01:20  <meshcollider> Hi
285 2021-07-01T19:01:23  <michaelfolkson> hi
286 2021-07-01T19:01:23  <jonatack> hi
287 2021-07-01T19:01:28  <gleb> hi
288 2021-07-01T19:01:29  <luke-jr> #proposedmeetingtopic When it's okay to auto-update across softfork enforcement
289 2021-07-01T19:01:35  <neha> hi
290 2021-07-01T19:01:47  <lightlike> hi
291 2021-07-01T19:01:49  <laanwj> welcome to the weekly meeting; there have been no proposed meeting topics for this week, any last minute ones?
292 2021-07-01T19:02:05  <neha> #proposedmeetingtopic Training to rotate release responsibility
293 2021-07-01T19:02:26  <luke-jr> laanwj: see ^
294 2021-07-01T19:02:40  <luke-jr> err, ^ ^ too ;)
295 2021-07-01T19:02:57  <laanwj> yes!
296 2021-07-01T19:03:03  <laanwj> #topic 22.0 release
297 2021-07-01T19:03:03  <core-meetingbot> topic: 22.0 release
298 2021-07-01T19:03:22  <achow101> hi
299 2021-07-01T19:03:46  <laanwj> we're getting pretty close to the 22.0 branch-off point, but some PRs are still open https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/47
300 2021-07-01T19:04:41  <laanwj> most have to do with the build system and guix, but there's also #22122 which is P2P related
301 2021-07-01T19:04:43  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22122 | ci: Bump macOS image to big-sur-xcode-12.5 by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #22122 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
302 2021-07-01T19:04:57  <laanwj> wait no not that one #22112
303 2021-07-01T19:04:59  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22112 | Force port 0 in I2P by vasild · Pull Request #22112 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
304 2021-07-01T19:05:32  <laanwj> i'm thinking of removing #20234 from the milestone because there is some concept discussion/disagreement, it's a bit too late in the cycle for that and it's not critical to have in 22.0
305 2021-07-01T19:05:35  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20234 | net: dont extra bind for Tor if binds are restricted by vasild · Pull Request #20234 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
306 2021-07-01T19:05:42  <achow101> should the guix stuff be kept? they're both still drafts
307 2021-07-01T19:05:54  <laanwj> the guix stuff is needed to do a release
308 2021-07-01T19:06:02  <laanwj> not sure why they're draft labeled
309 2021-07-01T19:06:42  <jonasschnelli> hi
310 2021-07-01T19:06:44  <jarolrod> ^ pinging dongcarl
311 2021-07-01T19:06:48  <luke-jr> unless we just use gitian again
312 2021-07-01T19:06:55  <achow101>  #21711 is just docs and some error checking, so I don't think it is necessary
313 2021-07-01T19:06:58  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
314 2021-07-01T19:06:58  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21711 | guix: Add full installation and usage documentation by dongcarl · Pull Request #21711 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
315 2021-07-01T19:07:16  <laanwj> docs are very important because a lot of people are going to do guix builds for the first time
316 2021-07-01T19:08:02  <hebasto> luke-jr: #22365 and guix, or multiple glibc symbol compatibility fixups and gitian
317 2021-07-01T19:08:05  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22365 | guix: Avoid relying on newer symbols by rebasing our cross toolchains on older glibcs by dongcarl · Pull Request #22365 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
318 2021-07-01T19:08:10  <laanwj> luke-jr: if there is a problem with the guix build we can always fall back to gitian, but it is unlikely
319 2021-07-01T19:09:16  <luke-jr> hebasto: gitian should be fixed even if we use guix
320 2021-07-01T19:09:19  <laanwj> it might be possible that bugfixes are still added for the 22.0 milestone but the feature freeze is active now
321 2021-07-01T19:09:33  <dongcarl> Hi
322 2021-07-01T19:09:54  <dongcarl> I’m working on the docs right now, updating for Guix 1.3.0
323 2021-07-01T19:10:15  <dongcarl> Are we talking about fixing the gitian build for the symbol problem?
324 2021-07-01T19:10:20  <laanwj> (and so is the translation string freeze, we've done the last update of the source translations pre-rc a few hours ago)
325 2021-07-01T19:10:47  <laanwj> dongcarl: achow101  just noted that your PRs on the 22.0 milestone are labeled as draft, which is somewhat confusing
326 2021-07-01T19:11:42  <dongcarl> Yes I intend on adding more commentary to those PRs so that’s why they are still Draft
327 2021-07-01T19:11:56  <dongcarl> Can mark as ready if people want, no strong opinions
328 2021-07-01T19:12:11  <laanwj> it's fine imo
329 2021-07-01T19:12:36  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
330 2021-07-01T19:13:03  <dongcarl> Happy to answer any more questions :-)
331 2021-07-01T19:13:19  <laanwj> #topic
332 2021-07-01T19:13:19  <core-meetingbot> topic:
333 2021-07-01T19:13:26  <laanwj> #topic When it's okay to auto-update across softfork enforcement (luke-jr)
334 2021-07-01T19:13:27  <core-meetingbot> topic: When it's okay to auto-update across softfork enforcement (luke-jr)
335 2021-07-01T19:14:10  <luke-jr> We obviously don't have any auto-updates in Core, but some things exist (Snap, PPAs, Gentoo pkg) which do allow for users to auto-upgrade
336 2021-07-01T19:14:44  <luke-jr> Softforks should be consensual, but when does it move on to the point where it's just assumed users want it?
337 2021-07-01T19:15:26  <luke-jr> any thoughts?
338 2021-07-01T19:15:42  <achow101> presumably after lock in?
339 2021-07-01T19:15:46  <luke-jr> (my Core PPA is still at 0.21.0 pending some solution)
340 2021-07-01T19:15:55  <luke-jr> achow101: but lock-in is just miners, not the community
341 2021-07-01T19:16:05  <ariard> well we have buried deployment which are quite making assumptions on users w.r.t to softfork activation
342 2021-07-01T19:16:12  <ariard> bip90
343 2021-07-01T19:16:14  <luke-jr> do we then assume any opposed users would have forked off at this point?
344 2021-07-01T19:16:31  <luke-jr> ariard: but those are already active, which I think is a very clear safe time to do it
345 2021-07-01T19:16:49  <sipa> is it possible in snap etc to have a different channel or package name per release?
346 2021-07-01T19:16:51  <luke-jr> once activation, IMO it's pretty clearly fine
347 2021-07-01T19:17:25  <luke-jr> sipa: not sure about Snaps, but for the PPA, it seems to be possible to prompt the user to explicitly agree
348 2021-07-01T19:17:58  <luke-jr> there's some packages that added an EULA for a version bump prompting the user on upgrade, and that seems similar logically
349 2021-07-01T19:18:21  <luke-jr> Gentoo packages have USE flags, and can be set to not install  until one is set by the user
350 2021-07-01T19:18:28  <ariard> luke-jr: i might miss context there, but my reasoning by pointing to buried deployment is when we hardcode activation height we restrain user choice of opposing softforks
351 2021-07-01T19:18:32  <luke-jr> (which is what 0.21.1 is doing right now on the Gentoo overlay)
352 2021-07-01T19:19:00  <sipa> ariard: we can't wait for buried deployment here
353 2021-07-01T19:19:03  <luke-jr> ariard: by the time of activation, users need to either enforce, or reject the chain it activated on; the latter requires code changes regardless
354 2021-07-01T19:19:15  <sipa> ariard: we can't wait to release 0.21.1 packages until taproot is active, e.g.
355 2021-07-01T19:19:26  <sipa> (+ probably a few years)
356 2021-07-01T19:19:54  <luke-jr> yeah, simply not having packages is a problem too because most users *will* want to upgrade
357 2021-07-01T19:20:02  <luke-jr> doing so should be easy
358 2021-07-01T19:20:08  <sipa> and i don't think opposition is the right criterion here; nothing is being forced
359 2021-07-01T19:20:17  <sipa> the question is about unaware upgrading
360 2021-07-01T19:20:32  <ariard> luke-jr: gotcha it's regard with increasing the number of users with softfork enforcement logic at time of taproot activation?
361 2021-07-01T19:20:37  <sipa> if people were aware of a softfork they'd active oppose, they'd stop using the snap/ppa/whatever
362 2021-07-01T19:21:05  <sipa> ariard: no, it's just that people shouldn't be opted into enforcing softfork rules without being aware of it
363 2021-07-01T19:21:06  <luke-jr> ariard: softforks without user enforcement are effectively failed softforks
364 2021-07-01T19:22:15  <sipa> ariard: the concern is simply that whomever has the PPA/snap/... admin powers could push new consensus rule enforcement onto the network, without the node operators being aware
365 2021-07-01T19:22:29  *** Talkless <Talkless!~Talkless@mail.dargis.net> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
366 2021-07-01T19:22:37  <sipa> this is the reason why bitcoin core's own release mechanism explicitly does not have an auto-upgrade mechanism
367 2021-07-01T19:22:57  <sipa> but this is obviously bypassed by using distro-packaged versions that do automatically update
368 2021-07-01T19:23:09  <luke-jr> obviously not-pushing a good change doesn't stop someone from pushing a bad one, but there's an ethical and liability side as well
369 2021-07-01T19:23:12  <ariard> sipa: okay so it's about making showy the upgrade of PPA/snap/... etc in case of node operators disapprove the new consensus rules and want to switch vendors ?
370 2021-07-01T19:23:25  <sipa> ariard: i don't know what the solution is
371 2021-07-01T19:23:28  <luke-jr> ariard: the node owner should be the one to make the decision
372 2021-07-01T19:23:41  <ariard> luke-jr: fully agree on this!
373 2021-07-01T19:24:01  <ariard> but a lot of folks might just fetch package without reading release notes
374 2021-07-01T19:24:13  <sipa> that's inevitable
375 2021-07-01T19:24:29  <ariard> i think so too
376 2021-07-01T19:24:36  <luke-jr> ariard: bitcoincore.org's blog post has the title specific to Taproot too for example
377 2021-07-01T19:24:59  <laanwj> yes the thing with linux distributions is that the user will get the update together with tons of other package updates, they might not even notice it
378 2021-07-01T19:25:14  <luke-jr> I *can* make the PPA and Gentoo stuff force user consent explicitly; the question is when it's okay to omit that ;)
379 2021-07-01T19:25:27  <luke-jr> (MarcoFalke would have to comment on his snap stuff)
380 2021-07-01T19:25:43  <laanwj> being at the least able to show release notes would be nice, freebsd has this for significant changes, but dunno about linux distros, never saw it in debian afaik
381 2021-07-01T19:26:55  <ariard> luke-jr: imho, i would say it's more a PPA/gentoo/snap admin policy there, hard to all agree on this?
382 2021-07-01T19:27:06  <harding> debian has an opt-in setting for major release note stuff.
383 2021-07-01T19:27:29  <laanwj> (and for people doing background automatic updates that wouldn't work anyway)
384 2021-07-01T19:27:32  <laanwj> harding: oh good to know
385 2021-07-01T19:28:05  <sipa> in a way this is a strange discussion, because i think we're effectively worrying about a rogue distribution maintainer
386 2021-07-01T19:28:17  <harding> For people with background updates, debian will main those notices to you, but only if you're like the 0.01% of people who still setup a MTA.
387 2021-07-01T19:28:19  <sipa> but if that's the case, they would obviously patch out whatever warning exists
388 2021-07-01T19:28:24  <harding> s/main/mail/
389 2021-07-01T19:28:59  <luke-jr> sipa: not necessarily rogue
390 2021-07-01T19:29:09  <sipa> and taking this to its logical conclusion, i think it's just that centrally-controlled package repositories are a risk... which isn't surprising
391 2021-07-01T19:29:18  <luke-jr> sipa: this is a real-world issue for me right now, I need to bump the Core PPA at some point before November
392 2021-07-01T19:29:41  <laanwj> right, it's for good reason we resisted bitcoin being part of package repositories for a long time
393 2021-07-01T19:30:03  <laanwj> it's extremly unsuited to automatic updates
394 2021-07-01T19:30:19  <sipa> luke-jr: right, i agree this should happen for information purposes, but the real reason why you'd want to show that warning is so that users know "be aware, the package maintainer is including a consensus change in this release, which you're automatically getting - if you don't want that, move away"
395 2021-07-01T19:30:32  <sipa> luke-jr: and clearly, we're of the opinion that this consensus change is going to happen
396 2021-07-01T19:30:52  <sipa> so what is the warning protecting against? if this information was intentionally false, you'd also remove the warning...
397 2021-07-01T19:31:11  <luke-jr> because even honest package maintainers shouldn't make the call for users ;)
398 2021-07-01T19:31:28  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
399 2021-07-01T19:32:10  <ariard> sipa: well you might be a really rogue distribution maintainer and luring the user that softfork A' shipped in the package is software A that user heard activated in the public space...
400 2021-07-01T19:32:16  <sipa> i'm not sure. by installing through a package manager, users have delegated most of their power in having control over what they run already, regardless of consensus changes even
401 2021-07-01T19:32:24  <sipa> that's a concern on itself
402 2021-07-01T19:32:28  <ariard> s/software/softfork/g
403 2021-07-01T19:32:30  <sipa> but i don't know what to do about it
404 2021-07-01T19:33:12  <ariard> empower and educate users to have more of them building from the sources
405 2021-07-01T19:33:23  <sipa> yeah
406 2021-07-01T19:33:25  <sipa> also, good luck
407 2021-07-01T19:33:28  <earnestly> (Casestudy: debian would miscompile mpv against ffmpeg, mpv added warnings to avoid bug reports, debian patched the warning out rendering mpv's attempts ineffectual.)
408 2021-07-01T19:33:31  <laanwj> manually downloading binaries is fine too
409 2021-07-01T19:33:33  <jonatack> or download the binaries
410 2021-07-01T19:33:44  <harding> Some packages in debian come shipped in a not-completely-functional state; you have to flip some flag in /etc/defaults/package-name.  You can have Bitcoin Core 0.21.1+ require you put "taproot = yes" in that file before it'll run.
411 2021-07-01T19:34:14  <laanwj> just not anything that auto updates, it's also arisk if you're actually using bitcoind for anything; e.g. some software might not work with the new release yet, though that's mostly for major releases that deprecate or change RPC functionality
412 2021-07-01T19:34:24  <earnestly> You really have to leave these decisions to downstream
413 2021-07-01T19:34:25  <harding> (The debconf configuration wizard can prompt you to do that.)
414 2021-07-01T19:34:34  <earnestly> (I.e. not worry)
415 2021-07-01T19:34:38  <luke-jr> harding: but then we're patching the code
416 2021-07-01T19:34:43  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
417 2021-07-01T19:35:01  <luke-jr> maybe we should add a softforks=<list> upstream for future stuff like that
418 2021-07-01T19:35:29  <luke-jr> earnestly: there is no downstream
419 2021-07-01T19:35:30  <earnestly> That would be the best option, probably
420 2021-07-01T19:35:43  <earnestly> downstream here is defined as package maintainers
421 2021-07-01T19:36:03  <harding> luke-jr: eh, I guess.  Maybe then you could rename /usr/bin/bitcoind to /usr/bin/bitcoind-taproot and then use the symlink alternatives mechanism to manage /usr/bin/bitcoind.  That way users have to opt in to the "bitcoind-taproot" alternative.
422 2021-07-01T19:36:07  <luke-jr> earnestly: ie, me
423 2021-07-01T19:36:10  <sipa> and just have it not run if the flag isn't present? you'll risk maintainers patching it out, because it's too much of an annoyance to users
424 2021-07-01T19:36:29  <luke-jr> harding: won't it auto-switch?
425 2021-07-01T19:36:31  <sipa> and i think this also isn't the core of the issue
426 2021-07-01T19:36:32  <earnestly> luke-jr: That there is an overlap between upstream and downstream doesn't change the distinction
427 2021-07-01T19:36:40  <laanwj> yes , getting the update but ending up with a non-working binary that's pretty awful for users
428 2021-07-01T19:36:51  <earnestly> What you do for the distribution is related to upstream but not identical
429 2021-07-01T19:36:57  <luke-jr> sipa: right; we can't stop people from patchign things out, but this provides a good solution otherwise
430 2021-07-01T19:37:04  <sipa> i'm not sure
431 2021-07-01T19:37:09  <harding> luke-jr: I'm pretty sure you can control auto-switching via the package install scripts, but my Debian packaging knowledge is like 15 years out of date.
432 2021-07-01T19:37:11  <luke-jr> laanwj: GUI can prompt too?
433 2021-07-01T19:37:23  <luke-jr> harding: even when the prior value is being removed? :p
434 2021-07-01T19:38:01  <earnestly> sipa: Wouldn't bitcoin core ship with its own prefered defaults allowing users to override them?
435 2021-07-01T19:38:03  <harding> luke-jr: yeah, the different symlinks have priorities and you can set like -1 or something for never-auto-select.
436 2021-07-01T19:39:18  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
437 2021-07-01T19:39:26  <harding> luke-jr: also you could make the default /usr/bin/bitcoind a shell script that prompts you to opt-in to taproot.
438 2021-07-01T19:39:46  <harding> (Or whatever thing you as maintainer thinks needs opting in.)
439 2021-07-01T19:39:52  <luke-jr> anyway, there are multiple solutions; my question was mainly when we no longer should take extra steps like these
440 2021-07-01T19:40:23  <laanwj> harding: for user-facing tools that's fine, but that would go wrong if it's started from an (init) script
441 2021-07-01T19:40:34  <laanwj> you can usually assume bitcoind is used as part of some stack
442 2021-07-01T19:40:50  <harding> IMO, three months after we've honestly done our best to announce the change is enough time for people who want to know to learn about it.
443 2021-07-01T19:41:06  <sipa> i think the message really isn't so much "warning, this has taproot, do you like that?", but it is "warning: the package maintainer you trust has power to make your system update to new consensus rules, you should be aware of that risk, and evaluate whether that's an acceptable way to use bitcoin"
444 2021-07-01T19:41:09  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
445 2021-07-01T19:41:29  <earnestly> They can just remove that, there's no point playing this game
446 2021-07-01T19:41:35  <sipa> it can also say "in this case, it is following the bitcoin core upstream release which has the taproot update included"
447 2021-07-01T19:41:45  <sipa> but that's just the normal release notes/process
448 2021-07-01T19:42:07  <harding> laanwj: I think it would only go bad in the sense of the software not starting, and as long as it prints an informative error to the log, that's not too bad?  If you're in a configuration where you're making major-version upgrades in an automated fashion, you have to be prepared for breakage no matter what (IMO).
449 2021-07-01T19:42:25  <earnestly> (I do like luke-jr's idea of having a softfork= option though, future?)
450 2021-07-01T19:43:10  <ariard> harding: if by "announce the change" you mean publicity around softfork locks in, 3 months sounds reasonable to me
451 2021-07-01T19:43:17  <luke-jr> the solutions I have right now just don't perform the update until the user explicitly agrees
452 2021-07-01T19:43:41  <laanwj> harding: this is not a major version update (0.21.0 to 0.21.1) ... but i  agree all of this is manouvring around auto-updates just being a bad idea for bitcoin in the first place, and people who use it through a package manager sign up for that
453 2021-07-01T19:43:50  <harding> ariard: I was thinking 3 months from the BitcoinCore.org release announcement.
454 2021-07-01T19:44:58  <luke-jr> but people might never see that :/
455 2021-07-01T19:45:13  <laanwj> we might want ot leave some time for the last topic
456 2021-07-01T19:45:42  <harding> luke-jr: yeah, it's not a perfect world, and I don't think we can fix that and still allow people to use the PPA.
457 2021-07-01T19:46:18  <luke-jr> maybe I'll just leave the extra step installing in place until November
458 2021-07-01T19:47:47  <luke-jr> laanwj: I think the topic is done
459 2021-07-01T19:48:09  <laanwj> #topic Training to rotate release responsibility (neha)
460 2021-07-01T19:48:10  <core-meetingbot> topic: Training to rotate release responsibility (neha)
461 2021-07-01T19:48:49  <neha> it would be good to train others to do releases. what do people think about laanwj mentoring people and eventually getting on a rotating schedule?
462 2021-07-01T19:49:30  <michaelfolkson> What are the responsibilities? Are there any that we wouldn't want to rotate?
463 2021-07-01T19:49:39  <laanwj> i think the best idea would be to have doc/release-process.md up to date so everything is in there, i've added some things already
464 2021-07-01T19:49:45  <neha> it could initially circulate among maintainers, for example. though it's not necessary to figure out a long-term plan right now. one short-term idea is for someone else to do the next minor release under laanwj's supervision
465 2021-07-01T19:49:55  <laanwj> but of course the best way to find out is to have someone else go through it
466 2021-07-01T19:49:56  <luke-jr> neha: it's not too hard tbh
467 2021-07-01T19:50:01  <luke-jr> we have good docs
468 2021-07-01T19:50:10  <neha> fanquake has already volunteered, i believe
469 2021-07-01T19:50:18  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
470 2021-07-01T19:50:35  <laanwj> yes, unfortunately he's couldn't be at this meeting
471 2021-07-01T19:50:38  <amiti> I think it's a great idea!
472 2021-07-01T19:51:01  <michaelfolkson> Any downsides? Presumably it would only rotate around maintainers?
473 2021-07-01T19:51:12  <achow101> wouldn't this require giving more people write access and upload access to bitcoincore.org?
474 2021-07-01T19:51:36  <jonatack> ^ i would have thought that was a maintainer role (more or less by definition)
475 2021-07-01T19:51:38  <laanwj> probably makes sense to do it for a minor release first, 22.0 is going to be different in some ways so it will take some extra attention (also updating the release process where needed)
476 2021-07-01T19:52:08  <sipa> laanwj: agree, but also feel free to ask if you see places where help is useful
477 2021-07-01T19:52:12  <luke-jr> there's going to be one more 0.20.x before 22.0, right?
478 2021-07-01T19:52:21  <achow101> we could trial with 0.20.2
479 2021-07-01T19:52:23  <laanwj> achow101: sure, or they could do everything except the upload
480 2021-07-01T19:52:52  <ariard> maybe we could have more distribution mirrors instead of one big official one like bitcoincore.org
481 2021-07-01T19:53:02  <luke-jr> michaelfolkson: NACK treating maintainers special
482 2021-07-01T19:53:04  <laanwj> there was another idea for the longer run to have bitcoincore.org build the binaries itself (it's deterministic after all)
483 2021-07-01T19:53:42  <luke-jr> laanwj: not sure we gain anything from that?
484 2021-07-01T19:53:44  <laanwj> then the maintainer would only have to do a tag, and trigger it, i guess
485 2021-07-01T19:53:51  <laanwj> luke-jr: no one needs to upload binaries
486 2021-07-01T19:53:52  <sipa> laanwj: that's cool, but it's also a really infrequent thing; making sure that keeps working may be more work than doing it manually...
487 2021-07-01T19:54:02  <harding> The deterministic build idea is already how we handle the website content basically, so it's not too strange.
488 2021-07-01T19:54:09  <achow101> laanwj: still have upload sha256sums
489 2021-07-01T19:54:13  <laanwj> seems beter than giving multiple people write aceess to the /bin
490 2021-07-01T19:54:18  <achow101> *signed sha256sums
491 2021-07-01T19:54:27  <laanwj> achow101: depends on how we're going to do the signing
492 2021-07-01T19:54:32  <luke-jr> laanwj: just check that uploads have N signers
493 2021-07-01T19:54:46  <luke-jr> we would want that even if it built itself
494 2021-07-01T19:54:55  <laanwj> achow101: but yeah, having that happen on the website is a bad idea :)
495 2021-07-01T19:55:11  <harding> If N people sign the torrent hash, then the website could download that directly.
496 2021-07-01T19:55:12  <neha> to separate the next minor release question from a longer-term strategy: it sounds like there is no immediate objection to fanquake doing the next minor release? when is 0.20.2?
497 2021-07-01T19:55:24  <laanwj> in any case the uploading is the least interesting part
498 2021-07-01T19:55:50  <laanwj> the rest of the release process is where more work is
499 2021-07-01T19:55:54  <laanwj> neha: sgtm
500 2021-07-01T19:55:57  <luke-jr> neha: it won't make sense to do it once we get to November
501 2021-07-01T19:56:03  <luke-jr> since it doesn't have Taproot
502 2021-07-01T19:56:14  <achow101> 0.20.2 is ready to go except for release notes
503 2021-07-01T19:56:26  <luke-jr> and rc cycle
504 2021-07-01T19:56:34  <laanwj> yes
505 2021-07-01T19:56:36  <sdaftuar> practical thing that people will have to figure out is what key they are checking a signature from when they download the binary/sha256sums. would that be fanquake's in this scenario?
506 2021-07-01T19:57:04  <luke-jr> sdaftuar: we really should be moving to a setup where many of us sign those
507 2021-07-01T19:57:06  <michaelfolkson> It appears to work well for c-lightning but smaller project, smaller number of contributors and seems to rotate around the three major contributors mostly.
508 2021-07-01T19:57:09  <achow101> luke-jr: we already have 0.20.2rc2 since early june
509 2021-07-01T19:57:10  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: sure, but i assume we're not there yet?
510 2021-07-01T19:57:11  <neha> sdaftuar: i think part of the goal is to achieve fault tolerance, so ideally yes
511 2021-07-01T19:57:15  <jonatack> looking at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master/doc/release-process.md to see who has been interested in the process, there are a few non-maintainers who have been interested, as well as the maintainers, generally
512 2021-07-01T19:57:17  <luke-jr> achow101: has anyone tested it?
513 2021-07-01T19:57:22  <laanwj> sdaftuar: it should be multi-signed i think
514 2021-07-01T19:57:25  <luke-jr> sdaftuar: it's just a matter of doing it
515 2021-07-01T19:57:38  <laanwj> sdaftuar: i think that's dongcarl's thing too, the same sha256sum is signed by every builder
516 2021-07-01T19:57:47  <laanwj> so the signatures can be concatenated
517 2021-07-01T19:57:52  <luke-jr> someone just has to copy/paste others' signatures into the file
518 2021-07-01T19:57:53  <achow101> luke-jr: probably not, but I expect that's normal for minor releases for old versions
519 2021-07-01T19:58:11  <sdaftuar> laanwj: ah ok. just want to make sure we think to do whatever communication to the community is required for the change
520 2021-07-01T19:58:29  <sipa> i think there is a conflation here
521 2021-07-01T19:58:32  <luke-jr> so long as laanwj's signature is included, I expect it will be smooth
522 2021-07-01T19:58:49  <laanwj> well i can do the signing and upload for 0.20.2 no problem
523 2021-07-01T19:58:52  <sipa> guix attestations only prove that a particular source code corresponds to a certain binary
524 2021-07-01T19:59:12  <sipa> an auto-building site doesn't need that if it does a guix build itself
525 2021-07-01T19:59:18  <sipa> the question is what it should be building
526 2021-07-01T19:59:34  <laanwj> sipa: the idea is that people who download the binary have something to verify
527 2021-07-01T19:59:41  <neha> a longer term question (which doesn't need to be answered right now) is how we might get to a placed where the community could tolerate it if laanwj's sig wasn't there for whatever reason
528 2021-07-01T19:59:54  <laanwj> sipa: currently the sha256sums.asc is signed with my GPG key, someone else cannot do that
529 2021-07-01T20:00:15  <laanwj> so the idea is what to do instead for future releases
530 2021-07-01T20:00:22  <sipa> oh ok, we're not talking about using guix attestations to instruct the site what to publish?
531 2021-07-01T20:00:29  <sipa> just something similar
532 2021-07-01T20:01:15  <harding> We've had to update the expiration on laanwj's key before, which created some confusion but not much.  On Bitcoin.org years ago, we saw that 99% of people who downloaded binaries didn't download the SHASUMs file, so most people aren't verifying in any case.
533 2021-07-01T20:01:34  <luke-jr> :|
534 2021-07-01T20:01:54  <luke-jr> harding: or perhaps verifying via gitian.sigs as ideal, but.. unlikely
535 2021-07-01T20:01:56  <ariard> harding: yes though maybe we can hope that the 1% doing it will serve as canary to alert the others ?
536 2021-07-01T20:01:56  <sdaftuar> harding: i think it would be terrible though if the few people who do verify, stop doing it because one time they tried and it didn't seem to work so they threw their hands up
537 2021-07-01T20:02:04  <laanwj> but yes it's kind of a hassle that so many instructions have my gpg key hardcoded now for validation
538 2021-07-01T20:02:09  <harding> I think on BitcoinCore.org, we could just provide copies of laanwj's signed shasums next to some other signed shasums file for a few releases, and then transition away from laanwj's to the alternative.
539 2021-07-01T20:02:13  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
540 2021-07-01T20:02:30  <laanwj> (well it's a separate distribution signing key, not my main gpg key, but still i don't feel comfortable giving it to others)
541 2021-07-01T20:02:40  <luke-jr> harding: the combined file would still verify with laanwj's key
542 2021-07-01T20:02:40  <sipa> of course
543 2021-07-01T20:02:42  <harding> The BitcoinCore.org download page has shasum verification instructinos on it, so we could mention any alternative.
544 2021-07-01T20:03:00  <laanwj> harding: makes sense to me
545 2021-07-01T20:03:40  <harding> If there's a clear plan for the alternative, someone please ping me and I'll open a PR for the website making the changes.
546 2021-07-01T20:04:06  <laanwj> harding: thanks!
547 2021-07-01T20:04:10  <luke-jr> fwiw I wrote this a while back https://medium.com/@lukedashjr/how-to-securely-install-bitcoin-9bfeca7d3b2a?readmore=1
548 2021-07-01T20:04:22  <luke-jr> but it's designed around gitian sigs, so will need a revision for guoix
549 2021-07-01T20:04:23  <luke-jr> guix*
550 2021-07-01T20:04:40  <achow101> I think a better test run would be 0.21.2 since we haven't started on that
551 2021-07-01T20:04:40  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552 2021-07-01T20:04:52  * dongcarl is here if anyone has questions
553 2021-07-01T20:05:05  <luke-jr> achow101: yeah, but no point training users on a gitian-specific verification if we move to guix
554 2021-07-01T20:05:20  <laanwj> i think it's time to end the meeting, we can continue this topic some other time if needed
555 2021-07-01T20:05:44  <laanwj> #endmeeting
556 2021-07-01T20:05:44  <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
557 2021-07-01T20:05:44  <core-meetingbot> Meeting ended Thu Jul  1 20:05:44 2021 UTC.
558 2021-07-01T20:05:44  <core-meetingbot> Minutes:        https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings/logs/bitcoin-core-dev/2021/bitcoin-core-dev.2021-07-01-19.00.moin.txt
559 2021-07-01T20:07:44  <michaelfolkson> Having multiple bitcoincore.org equivalents and rotation of release signers sounds good (decentralization, reduce single points of failure) but could certainly introduce confusion for users
560 2021-07-01T20:07:57  *** lukedashjr <lukedashjr!~luke-jr@user/luke-jr> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
561 2021-07-01T20:08:10  <gleb> While people are still here I wanted to mention that #21515 is ready for review again, although it makes sense to review #21859 first if you feel like it.
562 2021-07-01T20:08:12  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21515 | Erlay: bandwidth-efficient transaction relay protocol by naumenkogs · Pull Request #21515 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
563 2021-07-01T20:08:14  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21859 | Add minisketch subtree and integrate in build/test by sipa · Pull Request #21859 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
564 2021-07-01T20:08:27  <jonatack> thinking out loud, of the non-maintainers, personally i could see achow101 who has been very involved in everything to do with signing and gitian sigs.  good additional criteria might be number of years active in general and in contributing gitian signatures.
565 2021-07-01T20:08:46  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
566 2021-07-01T20:09:46  <jonatack> quite happy to see laanwj continue as well.
567 2021-07-01T20:10:12  <michaelfolkson> jonatack: Right. Rotating it to anyone who puts their hand up doesn't sound like a great idea
568 2021-07-01T20:11:02  *** luke-jr <luke-jr!~luke-jr@user/luke-jr> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
569 2021-07-01T20:11:11  *** lukedashjr is now known as luke-jr
570 2021-07-01T20:11:18  <michaelfolkson> Someone like achow101 obviously would be zero problem
571 2021-07-01T20:11:20  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
572 2021-07-01T20:11:43  <ariard> yeah let's take time to do this, especially if you put more responsiblity on users to browse through multiple vending websites
573 2021-07-01T20:12:53  <laanwj> multiple vending websites?
574 2021-07-01T20:13:38  <jonatack> gleb indeed, looking forward to diving into erlay soon after 22.0 is ready
575 2021-07-01T20:13:50  <achow101> I'd be willing to do releases
576 2021-07-01T20:16:20  <laanwj> achow101: great!
577 2021-07-01T20:17:25  <ariard> laanwj: mirros? ultimately with bitcoincore.org you might have domain name/ip law issues :/
578 2021-07-01T20:18:02  <laanwj> ariard: i don't think that's part of the plan right now, there's bitcoincore.org and the torrent
579 2021-07-01T20:18:43  <lightlike> gleb: cool, I'll try to review soon! I read that you incorporated some changes (e.g. static q), is the BIP linked in the OP still in sync with the current code?
580 2021-07-01T20:18:51  <jonatack> musing, fanquake and achow101 are at the top of https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gitian.sigs/graphs/contributors by a fair measure, makes sense
581 2021-07-01T20:19:54  <laanwj> i mean, sure, you could have mirrors, but that makes it much harder for users to know what to trust, what if one gets compromised, in any case that can be considered independently, it's orthogonal to rotating who does the release
582 2021-07-01T20:25:55  <laanwj> jonatack: that's cool
583 2021-07-01T20:28:27  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
584 2021-07-01T20:28:59  <ariard> quick update on coredev making progress, we had a call with veterans yesterday :)
585 2021-07-01T20:35:43  <laanwj> ariard: thanks!
586 2021-07-01T20:37:41  <jonatack> laanwj: yes and as PoW it's not gameable, can't go faster than the releases :D
587 2021-07-01T20:38:41  <jonatack> ariard: it was great seeing everyone, some for the first time. i was quite distracted and don't remember who is now supposed to do what, so will look out for your recap
588 2021-07-01T20:46:38  *** GIANTWORLDKEEPER <GIANTWORLDKEEPER!~pjetcetal@128-71-13-182.broadband.corbina.ru> has quit IRC (Quit: EXIT)
589 2021-07-01T21:12:18  *** smartin <smartin!~Icedove@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
590 2021-07-01T21:28:53  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
591 2021-07-01T21:39:30  *** AaronvanW <AaronvanW!~AaronvanW@2806:2f0:90a1:5d4d:5c29:724b:fcd1:6a53> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592 2021-07-01T21:47:04  *** Kiminuo <Kiminuo!~Kiminuo@> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
593 2021-07-01T22:03:31  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl> has quit IRC (Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com))
594 2021-07-01T22:23:31  <gleb> lightlike: BIP is low-key in sync. The new changes technically don't violate the old BIP, but it might have some little references to meaningless (now) stuff
595 2021-07-01T22:24:31  <gleb> I will soon create some FAQ on protocol design choices and deviations from the original proposal.
596 2021-07-01T22:34:16  *** jeremyru_ <jeremyru_!~jeremyrub@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
597 2021-07-01T22:43:28  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
598 2021-07-01T23:10:39  *** sipsorcery <sipsorcery!~sipsorcer@2a02:8084:6981:7880::3> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
599 2021-07-01T23:33:42  *** earnestly <earnestly!~earnest@user/earnestly> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
600 2021-07-01T23:47:13  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev