12025-05-01T00:15:42  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  22025-05-01T00:19:12  *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@209.242.39.30> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
  32025-05-01T00:28:10  *** S3RK <S3RK!~S3RK@user/s3rk> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  42025-05-01T00:29:38  *** S3RK <S3RK!~S3RK@user/s3rk> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  52025-05-01T00:41:52  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
  62025-05-01T00:42:06  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  72025-05-01T01:39:14  *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@209.242.39.30> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82025-05-01T01:43:43  *** entropyx <entropyx!~analiser@user/entropyx> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  92025-05-01T01:43:49  *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@209.242.39.30> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 102025-05-01T01:49:38  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
 112025-05-01T01:49:56  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 122025-05-01T02:10:16  *** theariard <theariard!uid700794@id-700794.tinside.irccloud.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 132025-05-01T02:16:21  <theariard> won’t be present to this thurs. meeting, as it’s may 1st and schedule to be afk
 142025-05-01T02:16:35  <theariard> but i’ll try to attend next one may 8th to talk about the mod guidelines...
 152025-05-01T02:27:17  *** zeropoint <zeropoint!~alex@45-28-139-114.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has quit IRC (Quit: leaving)
 162025-05-01T02:58:39  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
 172025-05-01T02:58:54  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 182025-05-01T03:20:32  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] monlovesmango opened pull request #32389: doc: Fix test_bitcoin path (master...doc-fix-test_bitcoin-path) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32389
 192025-05-01T03:50:36  *** robobub <robobub!uid248673@id-248673.uxbridge.irccloud.com> has quit IRC (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
 202025-05-01T04:01:02  *** cmirror <cmirror!~cmirror@4.53.92.114> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 212025-05-01T04:01:33  *** cmirror <cmirror!~cmirror@4.53.92.114> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 222025-05-01T04:02:32  *** Talkless <Talkless!~Talkless@138.199.6.197> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 232025-05-01T04:14:55  *** mcey <mcey!~emcy@85.255.237.64> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 242025-05-01T04:17:31  *** mcey_ <mcey_!~emcy@85.255.232.51> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 252025-05-01T04:36:44  *** Guest47 <Guest47!~Guest47@cm-72-240-135-183.buckeyecom.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 262025-05-01T04:38:58  *** Guest47 <Guest47!~Guest47@cm-72-240-135-183.buckeyecom.net> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
 272025-05-01T04:39:21  *** Talkless <Talkless!~Talkless@138.199.6.197> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
 282025-05-01T04:56:58  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
 292025-05-01T04:57:16  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 302025-05-01T05:22:59  *** instagibbs <instagibbs!~instagibb@pool-100-15-116-202.washdc.fios.verizon.net> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 312025-05-01T05:23:07  *** jamesob15665 <jamesob15665!~jamesob@pool-108-44-244-6.clppva.fios.verizon.net> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 322025-05-01T05:23:07  *** jamesob443688173 <jamesob443688173!~jamesob@pool-108-44-244-6.clppva.fios.verizon.net> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 332025-05-01T05:25:06  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
 342025-05-01T05:25:26  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 352025-05-01T05:36:40  *** jamesob15665 <jamesob15665!~jamesob@pool-108-44-244-6.clppva.fios.verizon.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 362025-05-01T05:36:45  *** jamesob443688173 <jamesob443688173!~jamesob@pool-108-44-244-6.clppva.fios.verizon.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 372025-05-01T05:36:54  *** instagibbs <instagibbs!~instagibb@pool-100-15-116-202.washdc.fios.verizon.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 382025-05-01T05:50:38  *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:c1:cbfb:120:4bb2> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 392025-05-01T05:53:32  *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:c1:cbfb:120:4bb2> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
 402025-05-01T06:03:03  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 412025-05-01T06:05:19  *** jon_atack <jon_atack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 422025-05-01T06:07:44  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 432025-05-01T06:08:19  *** tinova41 <tinova41!~tinova@217.160.209.135> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 442025-05-01T06:09:56  *** tinova4 <tinova4!~tinova@217.160.209.135> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 452025-05-01T06:09:56  *** darosior <darosior!~darosior@109.205.214.46> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 462025-05-01T06:09:56  *** kerm|t <kerm|t!sid393220@user/kermit4> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 472025-05-01T06:09:57  *** tinova41 is now known as tinova4
 482025-05-01T06:10:11  *** darosior <darosior!~darosior@109.205.214.46> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 492025-05-01T06:11:30  *** kerm|t <kerm|t!sid393220@user/kermit4> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 502025-05-01T06:12:08  *** cmirror <cmirror!~cmirror@4.53.92.114> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 512025-05-01T06:21:29  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 522025-05-01T06:22:12  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532025-05-01T06:25:27  *** Guest70 <Guest70!~Guest70@2804:14c:7570:454d:2879:fc37:47ce:616e> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 542025-05-01T06:25:56  *** Guest70 <Guest70!~Guest70@2804:14c:7570:454d:2879:fc37:47ce:616e> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
 552025-05-01T06:29:34  *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:c1:cbfb:120:4bb2> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 562025-05-01T06:39:00  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 572025-05-01T07:00:38  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 582025-05-01T07:05:45  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
 592025-05-01T07:16:21  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 602025-05-01T07:22:12  *** robszarka <robszarka!~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:a42d:5114:b601:d074> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 612025-05-01T07:24:16  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 622025-05-01T07:25:48  *** szarka <szarka!~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:54dd:7a72:5af6:5bbc> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 632025-05-01T07:38:12  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 642025-05-01T07:40:50  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 652025-05-01T08:32:09  *** greypw1495085720 <greypw1495085720!~greypw@user/greypw> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 662025-05-01T08:32:24  *** greypw1495085720 <greypw1495085720!~greypw@user/greypw> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
 672025-05-01T08:33:28  *** greypw1495085720 <greypw1495085720!~greypw@user/greypw> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 682025-05-01T08:35:47  *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net> has left #bitcoin-core-dev (Closing Window)
 692025-05-01T08:42:30  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 702025-05-01T08:54:46  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] AndreaLanfranchi opened pull request #32392: Update .gitignore (master...gitignore) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32392
 712025-05-01T08:59:28  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 722025-05-01T09:05:36  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
 732025-05-01T09:06:01  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 742025-05-01T09:07:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #32392: Update .gitignore (master...gitignore) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32392
 752025-05-01T09:09:31  *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:c1:cbfb:120:4bb2> has quit IRC (Quit: Christoph_)
 762025-05-01T09:20:12  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 772025-05-01T09:21:09  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 782025-05-01T09:21:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/68ac9f116c02...fc6346dbc8dc
 792025-05-01T09:21:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6cbc28b monlovesmango: doc: Fix test_bitcoin path
 802025-05-01T09:21:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fc6346d merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32389: doc: Fix test_bitcoin path
 812025-05-01T09:21:43  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32389: doc: Fix test_bitcoin path (master...doc-fix-test_bitcoin-path) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32389
 822025-05-01T09:40:37  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 832025-05-01T09:44:40  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 842025-05-01T09:49:09  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 852025-05-01T10:22:33  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 862025-05-01T10:27:04  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 872025-05-01T10:27:51  <TheCharlatan> I'm looking for some block index size comparisons. Could some of you post the size of their blocks/index?
 882025-05-01T10:42:40  <fanquake> 294mb
 892025-05-01T10:46:39  <sipa> $ du -sh ~/.bitcoin/blocks/index/
 902025-05-01T10:46:39  <sipa> 116M    /home/site/.bitcoin/blocks/index/
 912025-05-01T10:56:20  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 922025-05-01T11:00:54  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 932025-05-01T11:01:35  *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r190-133-55-103.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 942025-05-01T11:15:31  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 952025-05-01T11:19:49  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 962025-05-01T11:48:50  *** PaperSword <PaperSword!~Thunderbi@securemail.qrsnap.io> has quit IRC (Quit: PaperSword)
 972025-05-01T11:56:21  *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@209.242.39.30> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982025-05-01T12:04:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] vasild opened pull request #32394: net: make m_nodes_mutex non-recursive (master...m_nodes_mutex) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32394
 992025-05-01T12:06:42  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002025-05-01T12:07:46  <vasild> TheCharlatan: 208M on one machine and 122M on another (that is `du -sh`, depends on the filesystem block size)
1012025-05-01T12:08:26  *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@209.242.39.30> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
1022025-05-01T12:10:06  *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r190-133-55-103.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has quit IRC (Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
1032025-05-01T12:10:21  <vasild> not much, it has just a few files
1042025-05-01T12:11:14  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1052025-05-01T12:11:25  *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r190-133-55-103.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062025-05-01T12:11:31  <vasild> and 113M on a pruned node
1072025-05-01T12:12:08  *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@209.242.39.30> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082025-05-01T12:13:44  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
1092025-05-01T12:14:00  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102025-05-01T12:14:50  *** brunoerg <brunoerg!~brunoerg@2804:14d:5285:84b2::1002> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1112025-05-01T12:19:09  <TheCharlatan> Thanks, interesting to see this magnitude of variance.
1122025-05-01T12:30:59  *** donal <donal!~donal@109.78.237.48> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132025-05-01T12:32:50  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142025-05-01T12:37:44  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1152025-05-01T12:37:51  *** donal <donal!~donal@109.78.237.48> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
1162025-05-01T12:38:04  *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has quit IRC (Quit: = "")
1172025-05-01T12:39:07  *** donal <donal!~donal@user/donal> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1182025-05-01T12:44:30  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192025-05-01T12:57:12  <laanwj> 123M here. some difference based on the file system block size is expected, but i don't think it should come out double?
1202025-05-01T12:58:02  *** kevkevin_ <kevkevin_!~kevkevin@209.242.39.30> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212025-05-01T12:58:02  *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@209.242.39.30> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1222025-05-01T13:09:00  <laanwj> as i understand, pruning shouldn't make a difference, block files are deleted but the blocks remain in the block index
1232025-05-01T13:10:10  *** brunoerg <brunoerg!~brunoerg@169.150.201.26> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242025-05-01T13:13:28  <instagibbs> don't remember the command but topic: we should decide a direction on OP_RETURN stuff
1252025-05-01T13:13:45  <laanwj> so the larger ones are interesting, maybe it's for long-running nodes which have a lot of stale blocks from reorgs
1262025-05-01T13:14:30  <laanwj> the command is #topic <topic>
1272025-05-01T13:15:16  <instagibbs> #topic let's decide a direction on OP_RETURN policy
1282025-05-01T13:39:35  *** reverseengineer <reverseengineer!~reverseen@user/reverseengineer> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292025-05-01T13:44:03  *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:c1:cbfb:120:4bb2> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302025-05-01T13:47:59  <jeremyrubin> tbh i don't really care to get involved in whatever the thing is, but I think the GH thread should probably get unlocked, maybe someone should just comment "will be reopened after a 48h cooldown"
1312025-05-01T13:50:13  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1322025-05-01T13:51:54  <reverseengineer> Did the Btc blk magic signature change or why do I, upon reading the first 4 bytes of blk000001.dat get s.o like d3f5 etc etc. ?
1332025-05-01T13:52:06  <reverseengineer> I downloaded the blocks without pruning
1342025-05-01T13:53:02  *** jespada_ <jespada_!~jespada@r179-25-202-180.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1352025-05-01T13:53:58  *** donal <donal!~donal@user/donal> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
1362025-05-01T13:54:59  *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r190-133-55-103.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1372025-05-01T13:55:40  <_aj_> fanquake: du -bh .bitcoin/blocks/index/ ?
1382025-05-01T13:56:59  <reverseengineer> 193MB
1392025-05-01T13:58:09  *** TorTanicc <TorTanicc!~TorTanicc@109.175.166.195> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1402025-05-01T13:58:12  <_aj_> instagibbs, laanwj: aren't you thinking of #proposedmeetingtopic ?
1412025-05-01T13:58:41  <instagibbs> the world may never know
1422025-05-01T13:59:01  *** TorTanicc <TorTanicc!~TorTanicc@109.175.166.195> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
1432025-05-01T14:00:00  *** banananananananz <banananananananz!~sdhfosduk@109.175.166.195> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442025-05-01T14:00:20  *** banananananananz <banananananananz!~sdhfosduk@109.175.166.195> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
1452025-05-01T14:02:19  <reverseengineer> _aj_: I rule out corrupt blocks because the latest blocks show the same first bytes. The issue is that due to this issue I can't read the size of blocks etc.
1462025-05-01T14:04:51  <laanwj> _aj_: oh, oops, yes, #topic is a command but it sets the current topic it doesn't propose one
1472025-05-01T14:05:44  <laanwj> anyhow, it's probably clear by now
1482025-05-01T14:07:30  <laanwj> reverseengineer: newer versions of bitcoind xor the blocks on disk to avoid false positives with virus scanners, see `contrib/linearize/linearize-data.py` how to handle this
1492025-05-01T14:10:40  <reverseengineer> thank you laanwj
1502025-05-01T14:15:34  *** reverseengineer <reverseengineer!~reverseen@user/reverseengineer> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1512025-05-01T14:45:05  *** bugs_ <bugs_!~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1522025-05-01T15:04:43  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1532025-05-01T15:06:32  *** eugenesiegel <eugenesiegel!~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1542025-05-01T15:13:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ismaelsadeeq opened pull request #32395: fees: rpc: `estimatesmartfee` now returns a fee rate estimate during low network activity (master...04-2025-fee-estimate-with-low-network-activity) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32395
1552025-05-01T15:17:44  *** jon_atack <jon_atack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1562025-05-01T15:22:30  *** eugenesiegel <eugenesiegel!~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1572025-05-01T15:25:03  <fanquake> _aj_: yea
1582025-05-01T15:28:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #32396: cmake: Add application manifests when cross-compiling for Windows (master...250501-app-manifest) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32396
1592025-05-01T15:36:48  *** aleggg <aleggg!~aleggg@187.101.224.222> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
1602025-05-01T15:37:27  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1612025-05-01T15:39:01  <_aj_> fanquake: even -bh says ~300MB? weird
1622025-05-01T15:39:41  <fanquake> _aj_: this is bsd du, on a macos box, so there's no -b
1632025-05-01T15:40:02  <_aj_> fanquake: haha, sucks to be you
1642025-05-01T15:40:06  <fanquake> I can check some others later
1652025-05-01T15:42:47  <_aj_> fanquake: find .bitcoin/blocks/index -printf "%s\n" | (x=0; while read a; do x=$(($x+$a)); done; echo $((x/1024/1024)) )
1662025-05-01T15:45:47  <fanquake> _aj_: did you think BSD find would be so useful to implement -printf
1672025-05-01T15:46:26  <_aj_> can't you use homebrew or something to upgrade to the 90s?
1682025-05-01T15:47:10  <fanquake> yea there's probably a g prefixed tool floating around somewhere
1692025-05-01T15:47:16  <laanwj> fanquake: here's a python version: https://gist.github.com/laanwj/0ebfea4a32cfe3bbeff8b05fb2a5d788
1702025-05-01T15:51:02  *** aleggg <aleggg!~aleggg@187.101.224.222> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1712025-05-01T15:54:23  *** sebastianvstaa <sebastianvstaa!~sebastian@45.86.202.151> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722025-05-01T15:55:26  *** zeropoint <zeropoint!~alex@45-28-139-114.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732025-05-01T15:58:54  *** Emc99 <Emc99!~Emc99@212.129.80.110> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742025-05-01T15:59:02  *** rkrux <rkrux!~rkrux@user/rkrux> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752025-05-01T16:00:10  <achow101> #startmeeting
1762025-05-01T16:00:10  <corebot> achow101: Meeting started at 2025-05-01T16:00+0000
1772025-05-01T16:00:11  <corebot> achow101: Current chairs: achow101
1782025-05-01T16:00:12  <corebot> achow101: Useful commands: #action #info #idea #link #topic #motion #vote #close #endmeeting
1792025-05-01T16:00:13  <corebot> achow101: See also: https://hcoop-meetbot.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
1802025-05-01T16:00:14  <corebot> achow101: Participants should now identify themselves with '#here' or with an alias like '#here FirstLast'
1812025-05-01T16:00:20  <achow101> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: abubakarsadiq achow101 _aj_ ajonas b10c brunoerg cfields darosior dergoegge fanquake fjahr furszy gleb glozow hebasto instagibbs jarolrod jonatack josibake kanzure laanwj LarryRuane lightlike luke-jr maflcko marcofleon maxedw Murch pinheadmz provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar S3RK stickies-v sipa sr_gi tdb3 theStack TheCharlatan vasild willcl-ark
1822025-05-01T16:00:22  <rkrux> hi
1832025-05-01T16:00:22  <TheCharlatan> hi
1842025-05-01T16:00:23  <stickies-v> hi
1852025-05-01T16:00:24  <johnny9dev> hi
1862025-05-01T16:00:25  <jonatack> hi
1872025-05-01T16:00:25  <instagibbs> hi
1882025-05-01T16:00:27  <hodlinator> hi
1892025-05-01T16:00:28  <cfields> hi
1902025-05-01T16:00:30  <pinheadmz> Hi
1912025-05-01T16:00:35  <kevkevin_> hi
1922025-05-01T16:00:37  <achow101> There are 2 pre-proposed meeting topics this week. Any last minute ones to add?
1932025-05-01T16:00:39  <sr_gi[m]> hi
1942025-05-01T16:00:45  <kanzure> hi
1952025-05-01T16:00:46  <willcl-ark> hi
1962025-05-01T16:00:47  *** bugs_ <bugs_!~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
1972025-05-01T16:00:49  <lightlike> Hi
1982025-05-01T16:00:57  <Murch[m]> Hi
1992025-05-01T16:00:58  <marcofleon> hi
2002025-05-01T16:01:09  <achow101> #topic Erlay WG Update (sr_gi, gleb)
2012025-05-01T16:02:26  <sr_gi[m]> I've been moving forward with Warnet simulations, small-scale on my local setup for now. Now that the experiments are design I should be moving to bigger scale experiments SoonTM. Nothing substantial to report so far.
2022025-05-01T16:03:20  <laanwj> hi
2032025-05-01T16:03:39  <sr_gi[m]> That's it on my end
2042025-05-01T16:03:44  <achow101> #topic Kernel WG Update (TheCharlatan)
2052025-05-01T16:03:47  <TheCharlatan> Still looking for review on #40595 and #31382
2062025-05-01T16:03:48  <corebot> TheCharlatan: Error: That URL raised <HTTP Error 404: Not Found>
2072025-05-01T16:03:50  <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31382 | kernel: Flush in ChainstateManager destructor by TheCharlatan · Pull Request #31382 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2082025-05-01T16:03:57  <TheCharlatan> Woops #30595 :P
2092025-05-01T16:04:00  <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30595 | kernel: Introduce initial C header API by TheCharlatan · Pull Request #30595 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2102025-05-01T16:04:06  <TheCharlatan> Over the past week I have been working on replacing the BlockTreeDB's leveldb with a flat file store.
2112025-05-01T16:04:13  <TheCharlatan> This is possible, because we don't ever delete from that data structure.
2122025-05-01T16:04:18  <TheCharlatan> I am working on PRing this soon to gather comments and completed the migration code today.
2132025-05-01T16:04:27  <TheCharlatan> The change was mostly motivated by kernel applications having to shutdown a node first before being able to read from its block store.
2142025-05-01T16:04:40  <TheCharlatan> This is not possible currently because leveldb does not allow different processes to read/write while the db is open on another.
2152025-05-01T16:04:45  <TheCharlatan> It does also bring some storage improvements and allows nodes to startup a bit faster.
2162025-05-01T16:04:49  <brunoerg> hi
2172025-05-01T16:04:57  <sipa> hi
2182025-05-01T16:05:35  <TheCharlatan> that's all
2192025-05-01T16:05:38  <cfields> nice :)
2202025-05-01T16:05:40  <willcl-ark> cool!
2212025-05-01T16:05:43  <darosior> hi
2222025-05-01T16:05:46  <achow101> #topic Cluster Mempool WG Update (sdaftuar, sipa)
2232025-05-01T16:05:46  <theStack> hi
2242025-05-01T16:06:02  <Sjors[m]> hi
2252025-05-01T16:06:15  <sipa> Not much to report.
2262025-05-01T16:06:29  <sipa> Hopefully the mining/eviction PR goes in soon.
2272025-05-01T16:06:30  <vasild> hi
2282025-05-01T16:06:55  <glozow> hi
2292025-05-01T16:06:55  <sipa> Mostly doing more research on better linearization algorithms.
2302025-05-01T16:08:14  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
2312025-05-01T16:09:22  <achow101> #topic Stratum v2 WG Update (sjors)
2322025-05-01T16:09:22  <sipa> Nothing from sdaftuar.
2332025-05-01T16:10:09  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2342025-05-01T16:12:46  <achow101> Sjors[m]: ?
2352025-05-01T16:13:18  <Sjors[m]> yes
2362025-05-01T16:13:23  <Sjors[m]> Not much to report
2372025-05-01T16:13:31  <Sjors[m]> Please keep reviewing multiprocess stuff
2382025-05-01T16:14:05  <achow101> #topic MuSig2 WG Update (achow101, rkrux)
2392025-05-01T16:14:15  <achow101> #31243 was merged, the next PR to review is #31244
2402025-05-01T16:14:21  <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31243 | descriptor: Move filling of keys from `DescriptorImpl::MakeScripts` to `PubkeyProvider::GetPubKey` by achow101 · Pull Request #31243 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2412025-05-01T16:14:23  <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31244 | descriptors: MuSig2 by achow101 · Pull Request #31244 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2422025-05-01T16:14:37  <achow101> #topic Legacy Wallet Removal WG Update (achow101, furszy)
2432025-05-01T16:14:43  <achow101> #31250 was merged so legacy wallets can finally no longer be created or loaded
2442025-05-01T16:14:46  <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31250 | wallet: Disable creating and loading legacy wallets by achow101 · Pull Request #31250 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2452025-05-01T16:14:51  <achow101> The next and final major PR in this project is #28710 to delete (almost) everything
2462025-05-01T16:14:53  <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28710 | Remove the legacy wallet and BDB dependency by achow101 · Pull Request #28710 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2472025-05-01T16:15:01  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
2482025-05-01T16:15:06  *** cotsuka <cotsuka!~cotsuka@user/cotsuka> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
2492025-05-01T16:15:07  <achow101> There are still several things that can be removed after in followups, e.g. GUI watchonly wallet things
2502025-05-01T16:15:32  <achow101> #topic orphan resolution WG Update (glozow)
2512025-05-01T16:15:54  <glozow> No updates, have been busy with other things
2522025-05-01T16:16:23  <achow101> #topic QML GUI WG Update (jarolrod, johnny9dev)
2532025-05-01T16:16:31  *** cotsuka <cotsuka!~cotsuka@user/cotsuka> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542025-05-01T16:16:32  <johnny9dev> Fixed remaining issues with bitcoin-core/gui-qml#448 and it is ready to be merged.
2552025-05-01T16:16:34  <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/issues/448 | Introduce Coin Selection page by johnny9 · Pull Request #448 · bitcoin-core/gui-qml · GitHub
2562025-05-01T16:19:01  <johnny9dev> That's all for now
2572025-05-01T16:19:04  <achow101> #topic moving the repo to bitcoin-core (achow101)
2582025-05-01T16:19:11  <achow101> After last week's meeting, I opened #32340 for further discussion
2592025-05-01T16:19:13  <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32340 | Moving this repo to bitcoin-core · Issue #32340 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2602025-05-01T16:19:20  <achow101> It doesn't seem like any new discussion really happened there
2612025-05-01T16:19:29  <achow101> Now that it has been a week, how do people feel about moving the repo?
2622025-05-01T16:20:32  <vasild> did anything happen with the bip repo in the meantime, e.g. did bip people decide to move it away from bitcoin/bips?
2632025-05-01T16:20:51  <achow101> nope
2642025-05-01T16:20:53  <jonatack> vasild: no
2652025-05-01T16:21:11  <instagibbs> does crickets mean ack/nack or pure indifference
2662025-05-01T16:21:15  <darosior> achow101: i wanted to chime in but didn't get to it. Can we punt for another week?
2672025-05-01T16:21:24  <achow101> darosior: you can chime in now :)
2682025-05-01T16:21:31  <jonatack> ACK for me, as i commented in that issue
2692025-05-01T16:21:37  *** eugenesiegel <eugenesiegel!~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702025-05-01T16:21:44  <stickies-v> not necessarily opposed but doesn't feel important pushing this through atm, let's just move bips and move on for now?
2712025-05-01T16:21:49  <willcl-ark> I think a little more time might be prudent here
2722025-05-01T16:21:57  <darosior> The perspective of "this is unnecessarily risky" is growing on me
2732025-05-01T16:22:01  <fanquake> optics-wise, I don't think it's a good time to move anything around
2742025-05-01T16:22:13  <achow101> one thing I want to point out is that the recent temp bans being issued do affect the bips repo too
2752025-05-01T16:22:14  <glozow> I would like more time
2762025-05-01T16:22:20  <TheCharlatan> yeah, great timing ^^
2772025-05-01T16:22:29  <achow101> okay, punt for another week
2782025-05-01T16:22:47  <stickies-v> i don't think next week is going to be significantly different
2792025-05-01T16:23:00  <furszy> +1 on moving the bips repo only - if that's needed due to the recent temp bans
2802025-05-01T16:23:03  <TheCharlatan> what will be the name of the repo in the bitcoin-core org?
2812025-05-01T16:23:05  <stickies-v> if the bips ban issue is fixed, there's no real urgency here?
2822025-05-01T16:23:17  <achow101> TheCharlatan: we can bikeshed that.. I like bitcoin-core/bitcoin-core
2832025-05-01T16:23:28  <Murch[m]> Some BIP Editors appear to think that the bitcoin org is the correct place for BIPs while Bitcoin Core should move out. Others seem fine with the move.
2842025-05-01T16:23:29  <achow101> moving the bips repo is up to the bip editors decide
2852025-05-01T16:23:41  <cfields> it's unclear to me on the issue if the org will transfer ownership or retain the current owners? As that was brought up las week, that's the bigger concern to me.
2862025-05-01T16:23:49  <stickies-v> Murch[m]: but the bip editor's can't get ban permissions in the bitcoin org?
2872025-05-01T16:23:55  <jonatack> achow101: agree with your naming suggestion
2882025-05-01T16:24:07  <cfields> s/will/would/
2892025-05-01T16:24:12  <achow101> cfields: I think the general sentiment is that the current owners of bitcoin/ will remain so, and no new ones will be added, regardless of any moves
2902025-05-01T16:24:18  <Murch[m]> stickies-v: I have mentioned that, yes
2912025-05-01T16:24:44  <cfields> achow101: ok, thanks. I'd suggest updating the issue to make that explicit.
2922025-05-01T16:24:50  <laanwj> bitcoin-core/bitcoin-core sgtm
2932025-05-01T16:24:58  <Murch[m]> stickies-v: We also have had less brigading in the past
2942025-05-01T16:25:02  <TheCharlatan> I'd like to keep /bitcoin. It would also make easier to maintain any existing cloning documentation, i.e. no need to handle the renamed dir.
2952025-05-01T16:25:06  <glozow> I thought it was quite clear we wouldn't transfer ownership of the org
2962025-05-01T16:25:17  <laanwj> yes
2972025-05-01T16:25:22  <jonatack> I agree the project owners in bitcoin/ would not need to be changed.
2982025-05-01T16:25:30  <achow101> TheCharlatan: the url will still redirect
2992025-05-01T16:25:36  <cfields> 👍
3002025-05-01T16:25:37  <Murch[m]> The Ordinals proposal had some, and there is a tiny bit on BIP 177, but we have so far done fine with just hiding a few comments
3012025-05-01T16:25:42  <glozow> TheCharlatan: +1
3022025-05-01T16:25:58  <jonatack> Banning hasn't been needed over the past year, until recently
3032025-05-01T16:25:58  <TheCharlatan> yeah, but you end up with either bitcoin or bitcoin-core on your machine.
3042025-05-01T16:26:03  <jonatack> in a single event
3052025-05-01T16:26:07  <glozow> that's not true, banning happens all the time
3062025-05-01T16:26:08  <jonatack> in the BIPs
3072025-05-01T16:26:15  <Murch[m]> glozow: Yeah, I think the ownership being retained by Bitcoin Core maintainers is understood
3082025-05-01T16:26:34  <darosior> Yeah it was a single event, and wasn't really effective anyways
3092025-05-01T16:26:40  <achow101> jonatack: I've definitely banned several spammers from the bips repo over the past year
3102025-05-01T16:27:01  <Murch[m]> Sure, but Spam is a clear-cut issue
3112025-05-01T16:27:14  <darosior> For low value spam ban can be effective, but in this case they can just be banned from the whole org
3122025-05-01T16:27:22  <jonatack> right
3132025-05-01T16:27:56  <achow101> yes, just saying that there have been bans issued for obvious spam in the bips repo, without the bips editors asking
3142025-05-01T16:28:53  <Murch[m]> It is my impression that the BIP Editors would be fine with remaining in the current org/repo at this time.
3152025-05-01T16:28:59  <jonatack> achow101: yes, and it's helpful. only referring to the fortunately very rare non-trivial bans.
3162025-05-01T16:29:42  <Murch[m]> There was a little bit of a debate about the bans in the past days affecting the BIPs repo as well, but I don’t think any of the affected parties were actively contributing to the BIPs repo at the time and the bans were short…
3172025-05-01T16:30:35  <jonatack> I think the BIPs case is separate from the bitcoin core one.
3182025-05-01T16:30:45  <achow101> ok, so i'll add this as a topic again next week, and if anyone has thoughts, please comment in the issue
3192025-05-01T16:31:14  <achow101> #topic let's decide a direction on OP_RETURN policy (instagibbs)
3202025-05-01T16:31:19  <instagibbs> hi
3212025-05-01T16:31:26  <instagibbs> The recent OP_RETURN policy discussion has been heated and has many viewpoints.
3222025-05-01T16:31:26  <instagibbs> I'm not going to recapitulate all background to the topic, that's DYOR stuff.
3232025-05-01T16:31:33  <instagibbs> Unfortunately, we have to make a choice and we need input from regular contributors who have put thought into relay concerns. Letting the topic linger with no clear direction just breeds resentment and saps the project's energy by wasting time and attention on what otherwise is a smaller problem.
3242025-05-01T16:31:44  <instagibbs> That said I see roughly four options of varying credulity ahead of us:
3252025-05-01T16:31:53  <instagibbs> 0) Decide as a project that we will not modify this relay policy, close PRs indefinitely
3262025-05-01T16:32:01  <instagibbs> 1) Decide that OP_RETURN expansion results in too much arbitrary data publishing, and double-down on transaction filtering. Make it a project priority. (to be clear, this was rejected as a group repeatedly with 0 volunteers)
3272025-05-01T16:32:06  <instagibbs> 2) Decide to adjust priority "dial" minimally to something we find "appropriate" for known uses to reduce harm we are aware of, and ship it. Likely to be revisited in future.
3282025-05-01T16:32:15  <instagibbs> 3) Remove limits entirely (~Peter Todd's PR)
3292025-05-01T16:32:22  <instagibbs> Regardless of my biases for one or the other, as a project we should actively pick one, and we need consistent contributors to speak up if they disagree with the direction. Once direction is set, the rest of the details are straight forward and we can get back to real business.
3302025-05-01T16:32:29  <instagibbs> That's it. Thanks for listening to my ted talk
3312025-05-01T16:32:58  <Sjors[m]> I think anything short of (3) will just keep bringing back the drama.
3322025-05-01T16:33:14  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3332025-05-01T16:33:14  <vasild> I guess the most liberal is to have this configurable in Bitcoin Core so users can set whatever mempool policy they wish. This way Bitcoin Core developers will not be perceived as imposing their views on the node operators.
3342025-05-01T16:33:15  <glozow> I don't think (1) makes any sense. (0) is giving in to drama
3352025-05-01T16:33:20  <Sjors[m]> (though avoiding drama isn't necessarily a good criterion)
3362025-05-01T16:34:03  <glozow> vasild: it is mostly configurable already. But long term I think it's a footgun to give options for users to... reject transactions that will likely be mined
3372025-05-01T16:34:19  <darosior> Storm in a tea pot. I don't think we should give in to bullies and do what we believe is good for actual Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin network users, ie the silent majority. I think we should merge Todd's PR and call it a day.
3382025-05-01T16:34:34  <achow101> configurability here is basically just a placebo
3392025-05-01T16:34:46  <instagibbs> vasild fwiw going forward we don't add these kinds of arguments if it doesnt achieve its aims and causes block prop to suffer
3402025-05-01T16:34:47  <Sjors[m]> vasild: except the documentation would have to list the downsides of not using the default, such as interfering with compact block relay
3412025-05-01T16:35:06  <instagibbs> from scratch I'd argue heavily against an argument
3422025-05-01T16:35:08  <darosior> I don't think keeping the option makes any sense once we switch the default to be no restriction.
3432025-05-01T16:35:09  <glozow> configurability at the cost of compact block reconstruction is irresponsible on our part imo
3442025-05-01T16:35:59  <eugenesiegel> I don't have much to add, but I agree with glozow
3452025-05-01T16:36:07  <instagibbs> I'm fine enough with 2, but prefer 3 out of humility of not knowing the next zk proof size people want to use, and do not want to revisit this again
3462025-05-01T16:36:28  <Sjors[m]> Also - as someone argued recent - it's arguably dishonest to ship an option knowing it doesn't work, i.e. a placebo.
3472025-05-01T16:36:34  <sipa> my belief is: you should only provide configuration knobs when you can give advice on when someone should use it
3482025-05-01T16:36:37  <achow101> I prefer 3 or 0, don't want to revisit this ever again
3492025-05-01T16:36:47  <instagibbs> ^ fair
3502025-05-01T16:37:01  <darosior> sipa: +1. And i don't think it holds in this case.
3512025-05-01T16:37:13  <TheCharlatan> is the reality that if configuration options are removed, a significant portion of the user base will switch to another implementation? Then I'm not sure if it is entirely irresponsible.
3522025-05-01T16:37:35  <achow101> TheCharlatan: a loud minority will, but they probably already have
3532025-05-01T16:37:39  <Sjors[m]> TheCharlatan: I doubt it
3542025-05-01T16:37:46  <sipa> or they don't run a node at all
3552025-05-01T16:38:07  <jonatack> perhaps consider spending time exlaining the issues involved to the outer community, if perception of bitcoin core is a criteria
3562025-05-01T16:38:09  <glozow> I wrote a comment about splitting out the option-removal part of Peter's PR. I think it's been buried  though
3572025-05-01T16:38:14  <Sjors[m]> We don't collect network metrics, but I suppose you could find out with some well crafted transaction broadcasts.
3582025-05-01T16:38:18  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3592025-05-01T16:38:21  <darosior> If default is no restriction we can't expect providing a knob to have any global effect (defaults are sticky). So the user setting it would just shoot themselves in the foot: either blinding them to unconfirmed transactions they compete with for block space, harming block reconstruction, or both. Therefore i don't think the knob should exist.
3602025-05-01T16:38:43  <instagibbs> jonatack we should communicate whatever the result is for sure
3612025-05-01T16:38:53  <jonatack> beforehand, in a way that doesn't disenfranchise people
3622025-05-01T16:38:55  <darosior> jonatack: spent some time this week doing just that, see https://antoinep.com/posts/relay_policy_drama
3632025-05-01T16:39:07  <glozow> can you explain on what "disenfranchise" means?
3642025-05-01T16:39:14  <achow101> Sjors[m]: with mempoolfullrbf, it didn't take particularly long or especially well crafted broadcasts to get txs to relay, even when a majority of the network hadn't turned it on/upgraded yet
3652025-05-01T16:39:15  <willcl-ark> I've yet to see a well-reasoned/data-driven arguement as to why having these transactions arrive to your node in a block, vs via your mempool, makes anything better. Having a knob to twiddle that setting does seem pretty pointless to me, so would also prefer 0 or 3.
3662025-05-01T16:39:16  <glozow> explain/expand
3672025-05-01T16:39:28  <jonatack> darosior: i read that, and it was very good until the last 3 sections imo
3682025-05-01T16:39:47  <jonatack> then it reverted to a tone that imo doesn't reach across the aisle effectively
3692025-05-01T16:39:48  <Sjors[m]> achow101: I don't mean that the filtering would work, just that we could measure how many nodes actually encorce an OP_RETURN limit
3702025-05-01T16:39:53  <Murch[m]> jonatack: I have already spent several hours explaining this week, there are a lot of misconceptions being spread by popular social media participants, though
3712025-05-01T16:40:05  <Sjors[m]> As a proxy for churn away from Core
3722025-05-01T16:40:26  <jonatack> Murch[m]: yes, i've been swamped with private questions by users and the community as well
3732025-05-01T16:40:34  <instagibbs> Pick a direction, draft a reasoning for it, PR can do normal review for implementation details only, remove any comments about direction since they're off topic.
3742025-05-01T16:41:08  <glozow> I do think we can do more on the outreach part of this PR, but don't think it's productive to try to convince all of the twitter people. Particularly ones who are clearly not interested in engaging productively.
3752025-05-01T16:41:17  <sipa> ^
3762025-05-01T16:41:25  *** eugenesiegel <eugenesiegel!~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
3772025-05-01T16:41:37  *** eugenesiegel <eugenesiegel!~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3782025-05-01T16:41:48  <glozow> In general, I don't think popular opinion should stop us from doing what is right. And I don't even think this is a popular opinion tbh, more of a loud one
3792025-05-01T16:41:54  <Murch[m]> glozow: 💯
3802025-05-01T16:42:06  <darosior> glozow president
3812025-05-01T16:42:40  <jonatack> it's more effective beforehand, but now that it's become widespread drama, i think reaching out with a tone like willcl-ark's recent meta comment is a good approach
3822025-05-01T16:42:51  <instagibbs> We can workshop the reasoning
3832025-05-01T16:42:54  <jonatack> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/meta/issues/19#issuecomment-2844984370
3842025-05-01T16:42:55  <sr_gi[m]> willcl-ark: +1. I think the argument that people against removing the limit are "ok" with transactions over the limit being included in blocks, but they are completely against them ever touching their mempool doesn't make sense. Specially when the alternative storing the same type of data in unspendable transactions that needs to live on the UTXO set potentially forever
3852025-05-01T16:43:15  <darosior> jonatack: i dispute that "reaching out" wasn't done. I explained the rationale on the mailing list. Todd only opened the PR days after that.
3862025-05-01T16:43:33  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3872025-05-01T16:43:44  <BlueMatt[m]> glozow: Not only right, but *important*. Sitting around and watching people fill the utxo set with garbage isn’t really acceptable.
3882025-05-01T16:43:55  <darosior> And if "reaching out" means appeasing people who are motivated by hurting the project and its contributors, then sorry but no i won't do that.
3892025-05-01T16:44:16  <instagibbs> You don't have to love Citrea's design, but actively reducing harm should be the default where possible.
3902025-05-01T16:44:42  <glozow> Currently the PR is locked for cooldown (fanquake what is the expiry for that?). I think that should be respected by everyone and we should never merge PRs that are locked. But afterward we should treat it like any other PR. Weigh in with your technical opinions and we'll decide; the garbage brigading can be ignored.
3912025-05-01T16:44:52  <jonatack> darosior: i mean reaching effectively across the aisle rathen than preaching to the choir, in a way that connects
3922025-05-01T16:45:04  <achow101> glozow: the expiry is when someone unlocks it (there is no expiry on locking issues/prs)
3932025-05-01T16:45:16  <glozow> ok. when should we unlock it then?
3942025-05-01T16:45:18  <pinheadmz> There needs to be more effective educational outreach
3952025-05-01T16:45:19  <Murch[m]> It sounds to me that there a) appears to be a majority for 0 or 3, and a bunch of proponents for dropping the limit. Is there anyone arguing for the opposite (0)?
3962025-05-01T16:45:28  <pinheadmz> I think before the PR is reopened
3972025-05-01T16:45:45  <pinheadmz> Or, counter propaganda ie why utxo bloat is worse
3982025-05-01T16:45:58  <Sjors[m]> glozow: I do think it's better to merge it with some open nits, and improve those later.
3992025-05-01T16:46:02  <achow101> glozow: the request was for a day, so basically after this meeting. unless it should be locked for longer
4002025-05-01T16:46:02  <instagibbs> pinheadmz I think drafting the "we're doing this and here's why" before unlocking is a good idea
4012025-05-01T16:46:23  <Sjors[m]> Not a huge rush either, but it touches a lot of tests, so might end up needing a rebase.
4022025-05-01T16:46:28  <TheCharlatan> +1 instagibbs
4032025-05-01T16:46:38  <Murch[m]> instagibbs: How is this different from the posts in the mailing list and the PR explaining all that exactly?
4042025-05-01T16:46:50  <darosior> instagibbs: +1
4052025-05-01T16:46:52  <instagibbs> If you have something to sign off on, I'll sign off on it
4062025-05-01T16:46:54  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@2601:640:8b00:2d59:8062:3489:c56d:f6e8> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
4072025-05-01T16:46:56  <pinheadmz> Murch those media are not properly formatted for all the users
4082025-05-01T16:47:13  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@user/pseudoramdom> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4092025-05-01T16:47:17  <pinheadmz> Users don't read ML they read tweets
4102025-05-01T16:47:23  <darosior> I'm annoyed that it makes it bigger of a deal than it is, but hey
4112025-05-01T16:47:28  <achow101> Sjors[m]: the conflict list appears to be quite small. there may be silent conflicts though
4122025-05-01T16:47:42  <instagibbs> darosior ship has sailed my man
4132025-05-01T16:47:44  <Sjors[m]> Maybe also point out the v30 branch-off is many months away. A well reasoned argument on the mailinglist could convince us to revert even months later.
4142025-05-01T16:48:23  <Murch[m]> pinheadmz: okay sure, but there do seem to be some people here that don’t seem to support dropping the limit, so I’m not sure Bitcoin Core can put out a blog post. Where would this be posted and by whom?
4152025-05-01T16:48:51  <Murch[m]> Sjors: I would not make that argument in public after seeing how that discussion went with mempoolfullrbf
4162025-05-01T16:49:15  <Sjors[m]> Murch: it takes the urgency away
4172025-05-01T16:49:21  <pinheadmz> Maybe instagibbs idea is more fitting. "We made this call and here's why"
4182025-05-01T16:49:29  <pinheadmz> But make sure it lists tradeoffs too
4192025-05-01T16:49:33  <Sjors[m]> But might make life for mailinglist moderators annoying.
4202025-05-01T16:49:44  <Murch[m]> I think I’d rather leave the PR open a few more weeks to collect more input than to offer reverting it later
4212025-05-01T16:49:45  <jonatack> My guess is the most diplomatic and humble approach would be to close it for now and begin engaging constructively, with the option to try a bit later.
4222025-05-01T16:49:49  <pinheadmz> Most importantly the users seem to think big opreturn means bigger blocks which means harder to run nodes
4232025-05-01T16:49:55  <instagibbs> pinheadmz no perfect options, but we're picking an options whether wer like it or not
4242025-05-01T16:49:57  <pinheadmz> That's such an easy thing to teach users about
4252025-05-01T16:50:01  <glozow> I think we could have a longer discussion about whether a prescriptive "filter" for good/bad practices still has a place in mempool policy, because this probably isn't the last of this flavor of disagreement. But perhaps for another day.
4262025-05-01T16:50:06  <Sjors[m]> Murch: that's fine too, if we can announce a specific intented merge-by date
4272025-05-01T16:50:20  <jonatack> The way it is done matters a lot to the outer community who want to feel heard and listened to. IMO.
4282025-05-01T16:50:27  <Murch[m]> pinheadmz: Which is funny, because OP_RETURN is not weight-discounted, so makes blocks smaller…
4292025-05-01T16:50:34  <instagibbs> glozow imo it's one of the last actually useful expansions that is in conflict with "paternalism" of policy
4302025-05-01T16:50:35  <glozow> I don't think we should give up *again*. That's why we closed it in 2023
4312025-05-01T16:50:37  <instagibbs> taproot is so relaxed
4322025-05-01T16:50:43  <pinheadmz> jonatack: +1
4332025-05-01T16:50:52  <darosior> How about:
4342025-05-01T16:50:52  <darosior> 1. PR gets re-opened
4352025-05-01T16:50:52  <darosior> 2. Every regular contributor who thinks this should be merged goes, ACK with rationale
4362025-05-01T16:50:52  <darosior> 3. After merging maintainers email the mailing list thread with their and everyone's rationale
4372025-05-01T16:50:57  <pinheadmz> Be mature. Close. Teach. Reopen
4382025-05-01T16:52:00  <darosior> Comparable to signing off on a blog post or something, without treating it as too exceptional either. Maintainers aren't caught on the spot because they can point to the support of all regular contributors.
4392025-05-01T16:52:09  <instagibbs> pinheadmz wanna spearhead a doc with me?
4402025-05-01T16:52:15  <instagibbs> I'll raise my hand
4412025-05-01T16:52:25  <pinheadmz> Sure
4422025-05-01T16:52:26  <jonatack> People think it will be merged despite all the nacks and objections. If core shows humility and patience imo it would surprise people and improve things.
4432025-05-01T16:53:08  <TheCharlatan> instagibbs, I'd be interested too.
4442025-05-01T16:53:09  <instagibbs> And to be clear, people are allowed to disagree, please speak up if you're just being sheepish. This is for the health of the project more than the feature itself.
4452025-05-01T16:53:11  <Sjors[m]> I tend to agree with jonatack that a few weeks delay might help, and doesn't hurt given that achow101 pointed out it's unlikely to need many rebased
4462025-05-01T16:53:33  <lightlike> jonatack: or it would show that brigading works, and therefore invite more of it
4472025-05-01T16:53:36  <darosior> jonatack: i have yet to see a good technical argument against it. We should weigh objection on their own merit and not give in just because people are harassing us. The count of NACKs is meaningless.
4482025-05-01T16:53:40  <instagibbs> TheCharlatan 👍
4492025-05-01T16:53:47  <glozow> I'll join on the doc
4502025-05-01T16:54:01  <darosior> instagibbs: +100
4512025-05-01T16:54:09  <achow101> i don't think there's any urgency to merge or close the pr
4522025-05-01T16:54:11  <darosior> (not to join the doc, for your last statement)
4532025-05-01T16:54:25  <darosior> Also, to be clear this type of transaction in Citrea is very unlikely to end up onchain
4542025-05-01T16:54:42  <darosior> I raised the point because it illustrates an issue with our policy, not because there is urgency
4552025-05-01T16:54:57  <jonatack> lightlike: i think the process hasn't helped in this case, as willcl-ark wrote in bitcoin/meta a couple hours ago
4562025-05-01T16:55:03  <darosior> But the more we wait the less probable it is that people will use the less harmful way of storing data..
4572025-05-01T16:55:06  <instagibbs> Maybe this can be spun into positive outreach to app devs too?
4582025-05-01T16:55:12  <Sjors[m]> As long as the effect of brigading is a mere delay, I'm not too worried about that messaging.
4592025-05-01T16:55:20  <sipa> darosior: i don't think days or weeks matter here
4602025-05-01T16:55:22  <sipa> but months may
4612025-05-01T16:55:30  <instagibbs> sipa +1
4622025-05-01T16:55:51  <Murch[m]> darosior: EIther  way, it would only go out with the 0.30.0 release in October/November, so whether we merge this week or revisit in two weeks doesn’t really matter much
4632025-05-01T16:55:57  <TheCharlatan> darosior, we at least have time to the next release, no?
4642025-05-01T16:56:00  <darosior> Yes. just pointing out that also from their point of view there is a lot of uncertainty. The harmful way of doing it is certain to work for them.
4652025-05-01T16:56:17  <TheCharlatan> ah
4662025-05-01T16:56:22  <furszy> darosior: if they don't use the less harmful way (when available) it means they have no incentive to do it?
4672025-05-01T16:56:31  <Sjors[m]> A few weeks should be enough to get darosior on Joe Rogan and explain it :-)
4682025-05-01T16:56:32  <darosior> Murch[m]: can get them to start allocating dev resources to take advantage of it. At least they know it will happen
4692025-05-01T16:56:34  <sipa> darosior: i don't think that's a good reason to let us influence our choices
4702025-05-01T16:57:04  <sipa> there is very good probability that citrea, or whatever individual project, just doesn't take off
4712025-05-01T16:57:06  <Sjors[m]> And more practically, it means several rounds of bitcoin podcasts can go through the issue and hopefully convince more people.
4722025-05-01T16:57:16  <fanquake> instagibbs: Is this doc / write up is going to go up on the website?
4732025-05-01T16:57:32  <darosior> sipa: yes again i'm not really concerned about Citrea's specific transactions
4742025-05-01T16:57:41  <Murch[m]> Giving people more time to understand the whole picture before revisiting the PR seems like a good idea and it doesn’t prevent us from doing what we think is right eventually
4752025-05-01T16:57:42  <sipa> right, likewise
4762025-05-01T16:57:49  <glozow> furszy: no, it means that our current "best practices" policy rules are prescriptive, but a poor reflection of best practices actually are
4772025-05-01T16:58:11  <Sjors[m]> It might not take off, but it does we have a six month delay in dealing with it. And once projects like this are deployed, it's harder for them to adjust - and really not worth it.
4782025-05-01T16:58:31  <Murch[m]> Responding with education to brigading and widespread misconceptions doesn’t feel like caving to the brigading to me. Closing the PR would, though.
4792025-05-01T16:58:40  <BlueMatt[m]> yea, letting this slip into the next release is really not okay, there's very nontrivial cost to the bitcoin system
4802025-05-01T16:58:41  <darosior> furszy: we should try to make the less harmful way be at least as cheap as the harmful way. We can do that byte-wise (and even better). But uncertainty is a cost too
4812025-05-01T16:58:47  <glozow> fanquake: I don't really think so tbh. But we'll need to write a release note so we can probably expand a little there?
4822025-05-01T16:59:05  <instagibbs> fanquake glozow as long as people go on podcasts I think that'll do more ;)
4832025-05-01T16:59:11  <fanquake> glozow: where will it go then?
4842025-05-01T16:59:12  <instagibbs> just needs to be public
4852025-05-01T16:59:22  <darosior> fanquake: release notes?
4862025-05-01T16:59:33  <pinheadmz> Needs to be treatable
4872025-05-01T16:59:33  <achow101> can also just be a super long comment in the pr?
4882025-05-01T16:59:35  <glozow> can we just post it on social media? does it need to go through official channels?
4892025-05-01T16:59:38  <pinheadmz> *tweet able
4902025-05-01T16:59:43  <pinheadmz> With clickbait title
4912025-05-01T16:59:50  <fanquake> So when it's being distributed, we are going to link to a gh pr, tell people to look at the rel notes in the diff?
4922025-05-01T16:59:53  <Murch[m]> The upcoming Optech newsletter will cover this debate, anyone want to come on the podcast on Tuesday to talk to me about it?
4932025-05-01T17:00:04  *** Emc97 <Emc97!~Emc99@212.129.80.110> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4942025-05-01T17:00:09  <darosior> pinheadmz: haha +1
4952025-05-01T17:00:41  <pinheadmz> Trick twitter users  into learning something
4962025-05-01T17:00:44  <fanquake> It seems odd that if as a project, we are deciding to do something, we wouldn't want to put that information in the most prominent communication channels we have
4972025-05-01T17:00:49  <fanquake> i.e the blog on the website
4982025-05-01T17:00:54  <BlueMatt[m]> Murch[m]: sure, if you want someone who doenst work on bitcoin core i can :)
4992025-05-01T17:00:55  <fanquake> and then link to if from our twitter
5002025-05-01T17:01:01  <BlueMatt[m]> oh wait ill be on a plane
5012025-05-01T17:01:03  <instagibbs> website is fine, did you want it on website
5022025-05-01T17:01:12  <glozow> a lot of people are not free on tuesday because they're flying to this conference where people are gathering to talk about mempool stuff
5032025-05-01T17:01:19  <achow101> i think we can decide where to post it after its written. the contents may help to decide the location
5042025-05-01T17:01:24  <instagibbs> yes we're going to have a mempool bloodbath next week
5052025-05-01T17:01:32  <instagibbs> should be awesome
5062025-05-01T17:01:34  <fanquake> instagibbs: I'm trying to figure out why it wouldn't go on the website
5072025-05-01T17:01:43  <fanquake> Seems like the only & obvious place
5082025-05-01T17:01:52  <Sjors[m]> glozow: that conference sounds like a good place to record some panels, assuming anyone who opposed this is there
5092025-05-01T17:02:01  <fanquake> If it's a change related to the software we are shipping from that same website
5102025-05-01T17:02:06  <darosior> If it's smaller than 1MiB i know where we could post it
5112025-05-01T17:02:11  <glozow> LOL
5122025-05-01T17:02:13  <pinheadmz> LOL
5132025-05-01T17:02:15  <instagibbs> fanquake I think it would be good there, sets the tone for the project
5142025-05-01T17:02:17  <Murch[m]> fanquake: I have the impression that a few people here are not in favor, but nobody substantiated that when I asked earlier, so maybe not
5152025-05-01T17:02:36  <glozow> It just kind of feels... too official?
5162025-05-01T17:02:46  *** rkrux <rkrux!~rkrux@user/rkrux> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
5172025-05-01T17:02:51  <fanquake> well the code change is going into the official binaries?
5182025-05-01T17:03:01  <BlueMatt[m]> the website has been used in the past for "~everyone agrees on this statement"
5192025-05-01T17:03:16  <instagibbs> I think it is official, in that we can disagree and move on.
5202025-05-01T17:03:18  <darosior> Yeah it seems to me there is much more important topic we could have a stance on, than Twitter nonsense about OP_RETURNs
5212025-05-01T17:03:20  <glozow> When is the last time we've written a blog post about why we merged a PR that wasn't fixing a vuln?
5222025-05-01T17:03:35  <darosior> But also i'm not opposed to having on the website, better than nothing
5232025-05-01T17:03:36  <fanquake> it seems like that is the case here though? Otherwise it wouldn't be merged?
5242025-05-01T17:03:37  <instagibbs> I'm not sure our past history is good example :)
5252025-05-01T17:03:40  <lightlike> segwit faq?
5262025-05-01T17:03:42  <BlueMatt[m]> i mean it can be a more general statement on policy
5272025-05-01T17:03:42  *** Emc99 <Emc99!~Emc99@212.129.80.110> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
5282025-05-01T17:03:50  <BlueMatt[m]> it doesn't have to be *specifically* about the pr here
5292025-05-01T17:04:07  <Sjors[m]> https://bitcoincore.org/en/2017/08/18/btc1-misleading-statements/
5302025-05-01T17:04:08  <achow101> glozow: 2017 i think
5312025-05-01T17:04:17  <pinheadmz> this is a progressive change
5322025-05-01T17:04:20  <glozow> yeah
5332025-05-01T17:04:44  <pinheadmz> and its in response to user feedback, its a win for the users
5342025-05-01T17:04:58  <darosior> BlueMatt[m]: +1 i think communicating on how we see relay policy as a project would be great
5352025-05-01T17:05:02  <instagibbs> The people that disagree with this generally think the direction of the last 10 years is wrong, nothing new here
5362025-05-01T17:05:17  <achow101> anyways, we're past the scheduled end time, so I'll end the meeting here
5372025-05-01T17:05:19  <instagibbs> BlueMatt[m] I'll work on integrating that 👍
5382025-05-01T17:05:23  <instagibbs> thanks everyone
5392025-05-01T17:05:31  <achow101> #endmeeting
5402025-05-01T17:05:31  <corebot> achow101: Meeting ended at 2025-05-01T17:05+0000
5412025-05-01T17:05:32  <corebot> achow101: Raw log: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-05-01_16_00.log.json
5422025-05-01T17:05:33  <corebot> achow101: Formatted log: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-05-01_16_00.log.html
5432025-05-01T17:05:34  <corebot> achow101: Minutes: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-05-01_16_00.html
5442025-05-01T17:05:42  <glozow> mempool manifesto wg?
5452025-05-01T17:05:52  <Murch[m]> lol
5462025-05-01T17:05:56  <achow101> lol, we can add that to the list
5472025-05-01T17:06:09  <Murch[m]> Have fun at BTC++
5482025-05-01T17:06:17  <BlueMatt[m]> we wont 😂
5492025-05-01T17:06:22  <Murch[m]> I’m sure you will have plenty of time to practice explaining it
5502025-05-01T17:06:27  <instagibbs> I will, because BlueMatt[m] will be miserable
5512025-05-01T17:06:28  <jonatack> btc++ is the mempool bloodbath? if so, i think there mill be people to debate with there
5522025-05-01T17:06:42  <achow101> jonatack: i think that's why it will be a bloodbath
5532025-05-01T17:06:57  <jonatack> ah, got it
5542025-05-01T17:07:23  <Murch[m]> I think Luke is giving two talks on policy, so yeah, there will be people that disagree there
5552025-05-01T17:08:19  <Sjors[m]> I survived OP_NEXT in the headquarters of the King of Ossification without a scratch, ya'll be fine.
5562025-05-01T17:08:26  <achow101> should the pr be unlocked now?
5572025-05-01T17:08:44  <instagibbs> Sjors[m] I saw you wearing that wizard hat
5582025-05-01T17:08:49  <instagibbs> (this is misinfo)
5592025-05-01T17:09:02  <jonatack> Sjors[m]: several of us indeed
5602025-05-01T17:09:34  <jonatack> hope to see some positive debates at btc++
5612025-05-01T17:09:44  *** eugenesiegel <eugenesiegel!~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
5622025-05-01T17:10:25  <pinheadmz> #restartmeeting
5632025-05-01T17:10:29  <pinheadmz> should we unlock the PR or not?
5642025-05-01T17:10:34  <pinheadmz> I guess not, not today ?
5652025-05-01T17:10:38  *** eugenesiegel <eugenesiegel!~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5662025-05-01T17:11:07  <instagibbs> Whatever is less painful for maintainers, PR comments aren't changing the direction
5672025-05-01T17:11:11  <Sjors[m]> instagibbs: neh I got a black one at their November event
5682025-05-01T17:11:15  <Murch[m]> Maybe open it, and if it’s still a flood of vacuous crap, just close it again
5692025-05-01T17:11:46  <pinheadmz> i vote stay locked
5702025-05-01T17:11:46  <Murch[m]> instagibbs: FTFY: ~maintainers~ moderators
5712025-05-01T17:11:58  <instagibbs> right, people not me taking on the burden
5722025-05-01T17:12:01  <pinheadmz> honestly if anyone has actual code feedback just email it to ptodd
5732025-05-01T17:12:08  <Murch[m]> haha
5742025-05-01T17:12:13  <instagibbs> retro, I like it
5752025-05-01T17:12:47  <Murch[m]> Leave it closed until the statement is out?
5762025-05-01T17:13:40  <achow101> :shrug: locked or unlocked, doesn't particularly bother me. I don't think it actually puts a burden on the maintainers, rather more on the mods. I've unsubscribed from it anyways.
5772025-05-01T17:14:22  *** abubakarsadiq <abubakarsadiq!uid602234@id-602234.hampstead.irccloud.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5782025-05-01T17:14:40  <pinheadmz> stay locked then
5792025-05-01T17:14:45  <achow101> alrighty
5802025-05-01T17:14:56  <lightlike> but opening just for one comment by a regular, and close it again right after is not a good look imo
5812025-05-01T17:14:57  <pinheadmz> like i said, productive feedback can go through other channels
5822025-05-01T17:15:05  <pinheadmz> and well have a new place for everyone to argue soon
5832025-05-01T17:15:06  <instagibbs> achow101 yep, anyone who matters has tuned out :)
5842025-05-01T17:15:17  <instagibbs> Well, not everyone, 90%+
5852025-05-01T17:15:46  <willcl-ark> I think it could be re-opened tomorrow. Gives a full 24h cooldown to people before jumping back in
5862025-05-01T17:16:01  <achow101> willcl-ark: it's been locked for at least 24h
5872025-05-01T17:16:31  <willcl-ark> yeah but AFAIK still doing the rounds on social media etc.
5882025-05-01T17:18:12  <achow101> lightlike: indeed, and we shouldn't do that
5892025-05-01T17:18:19  <achow101> (just noticed it happened)
5902025-05-01T17:18:40  <glozow> lightlike: +1
5912025-05-01T17:27:16  *** Emc97 <Emc97!~Emc99@212.129.80.110> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
5922025-05-01T17:32:40  *** jespada_ <jespada_!~jespada@r179-25-202-180.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has quit IRC (Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
5932025-05-01T17:33:21  *** dzxzg <dzxzg!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5942025-05-01T17:33:56  *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r179-25-202-180.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5952025-05-01T17:34:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Brotcrunsher opened pull request #32397: doc: Add hint about avoiding spaces in paths when building on Windows (master...HintNoSpace) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32397
5962025-05-01T17:36:24  *** dzxzg <dzxzg!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
5972025-05-01T17:37:35  *** sebastianvstaa <sebastianvstaa!~sebastian@45.86.202.151> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
5982025-05-01T17:39:48  <jonatack> pinheadmz: instagibbs: i volunteer to do a final review of the doc if you'd like
5992025-05-01T17:40:03  *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:c1:cbfb:120:4bb2> has quit IRC (Quit: Christoph_)
6002025-05-01T17:40:43  <instagibbs> once shaped up substantially it'll be posted here as a gist or equivalent 👍
6012025-05-01T17:41:01  <jonatack> cool, or a midway check if that can be helpful
6022025-05-01T17:57:19  *** bugs_ <bugs_!~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6032025-05-01T17:58:11  *** dviola <dviola!~diego@user/dviola> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
6042025-05-01T17:59:55  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
6052025-05-01T18:09:42  *** eugenesiegel <eugenesiegel!~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
6062025-05-01T18:11:35  *** brunoerg_ <brunoerg_!~brunoerg@2804:14d:5285:84b2::1002> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6072025-05-01T18:13:22  *** diego <diego!~diego@2804:14c:5781:836f::871> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6082025-05-01T18:14:28  *** brunoerg <brunoerg!~brunoerg@169.150.201.26> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
6092025-05-01T18:16:56  *** diego <diego!~diego@2804:14c:5781:836f::871> has quit IRC (Max SendQ exceeded)
6102025-05-01T18:26:38  *** diego <diego!~diego@2804:14c:5781:836f::871> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6112025-05-01T18:27:55  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6122025-05-01T18:32:48  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
6132025-05-01T18:36:38  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6142025-05-01T18:40:51  <Murch[m]> errrr, either open it for everyone or leave it closed for everyone, but unlocking it for one-sided contributions seems like a surefire way to exacerbate this whole waste of time drama
6152025-05-01T18:40:51  *** jon_atack <jon_atack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6162025-05-01T18:41:51  <Murch[m]> Ah, I see now what lightlike was referring to.
6172025-05-01T18:42:20  *** jonatack <jonatack!~jonatack@user/jonatack> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
6182025-05-01T18:44:04  <Murch[m]> Like are you trying to give other people more ammunition to take potshots?
6192025-05-01T18:44:55  <Murch[m]> that just undermines the work of those that have been doing outreach for the past two days to educate and try to build understanding for the bigger picture
6202025-05-01T18:45:04  <Murch[m]> srsly.
6212025-05-01T18:45:07  <achow101> we had a discussion, the comment is removed
6222025-05-01T18:45:40  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@user/pseudoramdom> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
6232025-05-01T18:52:39  *** Talkless <Talkless!~Talkless@138.199.6.197> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6242025-05-01T18:59:13  *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:c1:cbfb:120:4bb2> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6252025-05-01T18:59:43  *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:c1:cbfb:120:4bb2> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
6262025-05-01T19:00:50  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@user/pseudoramdom> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6272025-05-01T19:11:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] strmfos opened pull request #32398: chore(ci): bump docker/build-push-action to v6.16.0 (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32398
6282025-05-01T19:11:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 pushed 6 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fc6346dbc8dc...5b8046a6e893
6292025-05-01T19:11:56  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0ad7d7a Andrew Toth: test: chainstate write test for periodic chainstate flush
6302025-05-01T19:11:56  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d73bd9f Andrew Toth: validation: write chainstate to disk every hour
6312025-05-01T19:11:56  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b557fa7 Andrew Toth: refactor: rename fDoFullFlush to should_write
6322025-05-01T19:11:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 merged pull request #30611: validation: write chainstate to disk every hour (master...write-chainstate-every-hour) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30611
6332025-05-01T19:12:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #32398: chore(ci): bump docker/build-push-action to v6.16.0 (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32398
6342025-05-01T19:16:33  *** diego <diego!~diego@2804:14c:5781:836f::871> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
6352025-05-01T19:20:41  *** diego <diego!~diego@177.34.235.126> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6362025-05-01T19:25:29  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@user/pseudoramdom> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
6372025-05-01T19:26:25  *** jadi <jadi!~jadi@d23-16-146-102.bchsia.telus.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6382025-05-01T19:41:32  *** jadi <jadi!~jadi@d23-16-146-102.bchsia.telus.net> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
6392025-05-01T19:45:09  *** aleggg <aleggg!~aleggg@187.101.224.222> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
6402025-05-01T19:49:26  *** aleggg <aleggg!~aleggg@187.101.224.222> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6412025-05-01T20:18:43  *** Talkless <Talkless!~Talkless@138.199.6.197> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
6422025-05-01T20:31:20  *** bugs_ <bugs_!~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
6432025-05-01T21:05:54  *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r179-25-202-180.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has quit IRC (Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
6442025-05-01T21:19:33  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@user/pseudoramdom> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6452025-05-01T21:26:14  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@user/pseudoramdom> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
6462025-05-01T21:34:19  *** Guest69 <Guest69!~Guest69@2601:643:867e:3e10:bdce:afde:a7c8:a6ea> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6472025-05-01T21:34:24  *** Guest69 <Guest69!~Guest69@2601:643:867e:3e10:bdce:afde:a7c8:a6ea> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
6482025-05-01T22:42:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] mzumsande opened pull request #32399: cli: add -usefile option (master...202505_cli_loadfile) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32399
6492025-05-01T22:53:57  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@user/pseudoramdom> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6502025-05-01T22:58:19  *** pseudoramdom <pseudoramdom!~pseudoram@user/pseudoramdom> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
6512025-05-01T23:03:48  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
6522025-05-01T23:04:08  *** Cory55 <Cory55!~Cory55@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6532025-05-01T23:25:14  *** robszarka <robszarka!~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:a42d:5114:b601:d074> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
6542025-05-01T23:25:36  *** szarka <szarka!~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:a42d:5114:b601:d074> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6552025-05-01T23:54:09  <badkat> can anybody guide me to get into bitcoin network again? my last interaction to this blockchain was in 2013