12025-05-22T00:04:06 *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r179-25-104-223.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
22025-05-22T00:04:14 *** sliv3r__ <sliv3r__!~sliv3r__@user/sliv3r-:76883> has quit IRC (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2+deb3.1+deb12u1 - https://znc.in)
32025-05-22T00:04:28 *** sliv3r__ <sliv3r__!~sliv3r__@user/sliv3r-:76883> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
42025-05-22T00:04:53 *** richieoscar <richieoscar!~richieosc@102.89.22.143> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
52025-05-22T00:22:30 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62025-05-22T00:22:30 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
72025-05-22T00:25:30 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:e00:8778:8faf:885:ddda:d9da> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
82025-05-22T00:27:05 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
92025-05-22T00:27:05 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:e00:8778:8faf:885:ddda:d9da> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
102025-05-22T00:27:15 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112025-05-22T00:44:47 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
122025-05-22T00:45:03 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132025-05-22T00:48:16 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:e00:8778:8faf:885:ddda:d9da> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142025-05-22T00:50:22 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:c094:98ff:5bb5:f08f> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152025-05-22T00:51:19 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
162025-05-22T01:11:03 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:c094:98ff:5bb5:f08f> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
172025-05-22T01:12:25 *** Guest76 <Guest76!~Guest76@2600:100d:b00c:54a7:0:1a:40a7:be01> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182025-05-22T01:15:18 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192025-05-22T01:15:18 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:e00:8778:8faf:885:ddda:d9da> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
202025-05-22T01:19:05 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:e00:8778:8faf:885:ddda:d9da> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212025-05-22T01:21:54 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:c094:98ff:5bb5:f08f> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222025-05-22T01:21:54 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:e00:8778:8faf:885:ddda:d9da> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
232025-05-22T01:22:00 *** u0_a2683 <u0_a2683!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242025-05-22T01:22:05 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
252025-05-22T01:25:41 *** Guest76 <Guest76!~Guest76@2600:100d:b00c:54a7:0:1a:40a7:be01> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
262025-05-22T01:29:01 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:c094:98ff:5bb5:f08f> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
272025-05-22T01:32:51 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:c094:98ff:5bb5:f08f> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282025-05-22T01:33:48 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:c094:98ff:5bb5:f08f> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
292025-05-22T02:00:52 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] davidgumberg opened pull request #32582: log: Additional compact block logging (master...5-21-2025-block-reconstruction-logs) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32582
302025-05-22T02:06:36 *** Guest99 <Guest99!~Guest99@138019253118.ctinets.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312025-05-22T02:39:42 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
322025-05-22T02:42:48 *** u0_a2683 <u0_a2683!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
332025-05-22T02:43:18 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
342025-05-22T02:43:18 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
352025-05-22T02:53:11 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362025-05-22T03:18:11 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372025-05-22T03:20:53 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
382025-05-22T04:01:01 *** cmirror <cmirror!~cmirror@4.53.92.114> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
392025-05-22T04:01:32 *** cmirror <cmirror!~cmirror@4.53.92.114> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402025-05-22T04:05:33 *** vasild <vasild!~vd@user/vasild> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
412025-05-22T04:05:43 *** vasild <vasild!~vd@user/vasild> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422025-05-22T04:11:19 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
432025-05-22T04:11:19 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
442025-05-22T04:25:55 *** robszarka <robszarka!~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:28aa:caf5:198d:3518> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452025-05-22T04:29:29 *** szarka <szarka!~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:bd49:f7bd:8165:e390> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
462025-05-22T04:46:55 *** PaperSword <PaperSword!~Thunderbi@ec2-3-17-244-63.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
472025-05-22T04:51:42 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:be:4454:9e3d:16e> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482025-05-22T04:53:27 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:be:4454:9e3d:16e> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
492025-05-22T04:56:47 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
502025-05-22T04:59:30 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
512025-05-22T05:04:48 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522025-05-22T05:04:48 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
532025-05-22T05:04:48 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
542025-05-22T05:05:18 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552025-05-22T05:06:25 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:3ccd:106:9de6:2711> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562025-05-22T05:16:51 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
572025-05-22T05:25:37 *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has quit IRC (Quit: = "")
582025-05-22T05:36:21 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592025-05-22T05:39:43 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
602025-05-22T05:51:32 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612025-05-22T06:24:32 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622025-05-22T06:27:19 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
632025-05-22T06:47:35 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642025-05-22T06:47:36 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
652025-05-22T06:49:34 *** Guest99 <Guest99!~Guest99@138019253118.ctinets.com> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
662025-05-22T06:57:12 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672025-05-22T06:57:13 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
682025-05-22T07:08:34 *** purpleKarrot <purpleKarrot!~purpleKar@user/purpleKarrot> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692025-05-22T07:18:37 *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
702025-05-22T07:54:16 *** Guest52 <Guest52!~Guest52@114.10.47.60> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712025-05-22T07:54:32 *** Guest52 <Guest52!~Guest52@114.10.47.60> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
722025-05-22T08:27:11 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
732025-05-22T08:30:53 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
742025-05-22T08:36:20 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
752025-05-22T09:00:23 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 6 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/87ec923d3a7a...a42faa25d8f7
762025-05-22T09:00:23 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a8e2342 Hennadii Stepanov: cmake: Remove `ENABLE_SSE41` from `bitcoin-build-config.h`
772025-05-22T09:00:24 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8689628 Hennadii Stepanov: cmake: Remove `ENABLE_AVX2` from `bitcoin-build-config.h`
782025-05-22T09:00:24 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1e90052 Hennadii Stepanov: cmake: Remove `ENABLE_X86_SHANI` from `bitcoin-build-config.h`
792025-05-22T09:00:25 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32551: cmake: Remove `ENABLE_{SSE41,AVX2,X86_SHANI,ARM_SHANI}` from `bitcoin-build-config.h` (master...250518-crypto-macros) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32551
802025-05-22T09:33:16 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #32584: depends: hard-code necessary c(xx)flags rather than setting them per-host (master...depends_hard_code_flags) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32584
812025-05-22T09:36:50 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
822025-05-22T09:45:26 *** tarotfied <tarotfied!~tarotfied@user/tarotfied> has quit IRC (Quit: WeeChat 4.1.1)
832025-05-22T10:01:59 *** mcey_ <mcey_!~emcy@185.69.144.38> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
842025-05-22T10:04:45 *** tarotfied <tarotfied!~tarotfied@user/tarotfied> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
852025-05-22T10:05:35 *** mcey <mcey!~emcy@148.252.145.122> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
862025-05-22T10:06:31 *** [[a]TradeTestnet <[[a]TradeTestnet!~a]TradeT@47.214.145.207> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
872025-05-22T10:06:35 *** [AtAltQuickCOM <[AtAltQuickCOM!~AtAltQuic@47.214.145.207> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
882025-05-22T10:06:37 *** [[ForRealBitcoin <[[ForRealBitcoin!~ForRealB@47.214.145.207> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
892025-05-22T10:18:22 *** robszarka <robszarka!~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:28aa:caf5:198d:3518> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
902025-05-22T10:18:48 *** szarka <szarka!~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:28aa:caf5:198d:3518> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
912025-05-22T10:43:43 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:e4c0:e915:4356:76e9> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
922025-05-22T10:47:45 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:e4c0:e915:4356:76e9> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
932025-05-22T10:48:31 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
942025-05-22T10:51:43 *** spynxic <spynxic!~spynxic@spynxic.powered.by.lunarbnc.net> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
952025-05-22T10:52:31 *** spynxic <spynxic!~spynxic@spynxic.powered.by.lunarbnc.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962025-05-22T10:55:43 *** [AtAltQuickCOM <[AtAltQuickCOM!~AtAltQuic@47.214.145.207> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
972025-05-22T10:56:33 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
982025-05-22T11:01:49 *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r190-133-32-136.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
992025-05-22T11:05:02 *** [[ForRealBitcoin <[[ForRealBitcoin!~ForRealB@47.214.145.207> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
1002025-05-22T11:05:03 *** [[a]TradeTestnet <[[a]TradeTestnet!~a]TradeT@47.214.145.207> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
1012025-05-22T11:05:28 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 23 commits to 29.x: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3fad438b8300...589b56192f53
1022025-05-22T11:05:29 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/29.x ca70d5c laanwj: Remove support for RNDR/RNDRRS for aarch64 on Linux
1032025-05-22T11:05:29 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/29.x 85f3e1d Brandon Odiwuor: test: Handle empty string returned by CLI as None in RPC tests
1042025-05-22T11:05:29 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/29.x 64552c8 Hennadii Stepanov: ci: Add workaround for vcpkg's libevent package
1052025-05-22T11:05:30 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32292: [29.x] Backports (29.x...29_x_backports) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32292
1062025-05-22T11:13:07 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a42faa25d8f7...35bf3f88398d
1072025-05-22T11:13:07 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6b4bcc1 David Gumberg: random: Use modern Windows randomness functions
1082025-05-22T11:13:08 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 35bf3f8 merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32400: random: Use modern Windows randomness functio...
1092025-05-22T11:13:09 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32400: random: Use modern Windows randomness functions (master...5-1-25-winbcrypt) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32400
1102025-05-22T11:17:41 <gmaxwell_> darn thats sad that arm continues to be such a circus of incompatible hardware. :(
1112025-05-22T11:17:47 *** gmaxwell_ is now known as gmaxwell
1122025-05-22T11:37:03 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
1132025-05-22T11:47:37 *** _flood <_flood!~flooded@146.70.228.164> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142025-05-22T11:48:30 *** flooded <flooded!~flooded@146.70.228.164> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
1152025-05-22T11:49:01 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] maflcko opened pull request #32586: ci: Downgrade DEBUG=1 to -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS in centos task (master...2505-ci-centos-debug) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32586
1162025-05-22T12:09:17 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:f6:4da:44eb:c825> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172025-05-22T12:10:10 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:f6:4da:44eb:c825> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1182025-05-22T12:11:35 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@c-73-111-168-5.hsd1.il.comcast.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192025-05-22T12:16:54 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202025-05-22T12:18:03 *** charlie_capt <charlie_capt!~charlie_c@119.75.194.99> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
1212025-05-22T12:18:25 *** purpleKarrot <purpleKarrot!~purpleKar@user/purpleKarrot> has quit IRC (Quit: purpleKarrot)
1222025-05-22T12:25:28 *** purpleKarrot <purpleKarrot!~purpleKar@user/purpleKarrot> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232025-05-22T12:27:05 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
1242025-05-22T12:27:19 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252025-05-22T12:37:18 *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r190-133-32-136.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has quit IRC (Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzzâ¦)
1262025-05-22T12:42:33 *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r190-133-32-136.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1272025-05-22T13:04:35 *** Guyver2 <Guyver2!~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net> has left #bitcoin-core-dev (Closing Window)
1282025-05-22T13:07:32 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292025-05-22T13:08:26 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1302025-05-22T13:08:37 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1312025-05-22T13:10:49 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1322025-05-22T13:13:53 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332025-05-22T13:13:53 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1342025-05-22T13:13:53 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1352025-05-22T13:14:12 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1362025-05-22T13:17:07 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372025-05-22T13:18:20 *** u0_a2683 <u0_a2683!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382025-05-22T13:18:20 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1392025-05-22T13:19:03 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1402025-05-22T13:26:49 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] i-am-yuvi opened pull request #32587: [WIP] test: Fix reorg patterns in mempool tests to use proper fork-based approach (master...2025-05-update_test_reorg_behaviour) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32587
1412025-05-22T13:29:56 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] maflcko opened pull request #32588: util: Abort on failing CHECK_NONFATAL in debug builds (master...2505-abort-debug-check-nonfatal) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32588
1422025-05-22T13:30:37 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432025-05-22T13:32:13 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442025-05-22T13:32:14 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8004:1302:415e:61b8:48e6:8dc6:7314> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1452025-05-22T13:33:55 *** u0_a2683 <u0_a2683!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1462025-05-22T13:40:37 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1472025-05-22T13:42:35 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1482025-05-22T13:54:11 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
1492025-05-22T13:54:14 *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r190-133-32-136.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1502025-05-22T13:54:29 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512025-05-22T13:57:11 *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r167-61-220-219.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1522025-05-22T13:57:36 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #32589: [29.x] More backports (29.x...more_29_backports) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32589
1532025-05-22T14:02:37 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1542025-05-22T14:06:16 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1552025-05-22T14:06:33 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] glozow pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/35bf3f88398d...d2c9fc84e171
1562025-05-22T14:06:34 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7bc64a8 Sebastian Falbesoner: test: properly check for per-tx sigops limit
1572025-05-22T14:06:34 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d2c9fc8 merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32533: test: properly check for per-tx sigops limit
1582025-05-22T14:06:37 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] glozow merged pull request #32533: test: properly check for per-tx sigops limit (master...202505-test-exact_per_tx_sigopcost_check) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32533
1592025-05-22T14:07:34 *** Guest33 <Guest33!~Guest33@2607:fb90:4880:d62a:f583:e91c:c0bd:3231> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602025-05-22T14:08:24 *** Guest33 <Guest33!~Guest33@2607:fb90:4880:d62a:f583:e91c:c0bd:3231> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
1612025-05-22T14:22:31 *** dermoth <dermoth!~dermoth@user/dermoth> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
1622025-05-22T14:25:44 *** dermoth <dermoth!~dermoth@user/dermoth> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632025-05-22T14:26:56 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642025-05-22T14:26:56 *** u0_a2682 <u0_a2682!~u0_a268@144.134.58.114> has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1652025-05-22T14:45:42 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] instagibbs opened pull request #32591: test: fix and augment block tests of invalid_txs (master...2025-05-fix_invalidtx_test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32591
1662025-05-22T15:12:41 *** bugs_ <bugs_!~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1672025-05-22T15:27:23 *** purpleKarrot <purpleKarrot!~purpleKar@user/purpleKarrot> has quit IRC (Quit: purpleKarrot)
1682025-05-22T15:35:12 *** u0_a268 <u0_a268!~u0_a268@2001:8003:709f:5300:d96:86e9:bb42:eac8> has quit IRC (Quit: WeeChat 4.6.2)
1692025-05-22T15:40:36 <sipa> #proposedmeetingtopic Statement on transaction relay policy
1702025-05-22T15:47:55 *** purpleKarrot <purpleKarrot!~purpleKar@user/purpleKarrot> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1712025-05-22T15:57:36 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@c-73-111-168-5.hsd1.il.comcast.net> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
1722025-05-22T15:57:56 *** Emc99 <Emc99!~Emc99@212.129.83.156> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732025-05-22T15:58:50 *** rkrux <rkrux!~rkrux@user/rkrux> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742025-05-22T15:59:56 *** dzxzg <dzxzg!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752025-05-22T16:00:09 <achow101> #startmeeting
1762025-05-22T16:00:09 <corebot> achow101: Meeting started at 2025-05-22T16:00+0000
1772025-05-22T16:00:10 <corebot> achow101: Current chairs: achow101
1782025-05-22T16:00:11 <corebot> achow101: Useful commands: #action #info #idea #link #topic #motion #vote #close #endmeeting
1792025-05-22T16:00:12 <corebot> achow101: See also: https://hcoop-meetbot.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
1802025-05-22T16:00:13 <corebot> achow101: Participants should now identify themselves with '#here' or with an alias like '#here FirstLast'
1812025-05-22T16:00:16 <lightlike> hi
1822025-05-22T16:00:16 <dzxzg> hi
1832025-05-22T16:00:18 <rkrux> hi
1842025-05-22T16:00:21 <hebasto> hi
1852025-05-22T16:00:22 <abubakarsadiq> hi
1862025-05-22T16:00:23 <sipa> hi
1872025-05-22T16:00:23 <achow101> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: abubakarsadiq achow101 _aj_ ajonas b10c brunoerg cfields darosior dergoegge fanquake fjahr furszy gleb glozow hebasto hodlinator 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
1882025-05-22T16:00:25 <hodlinator> hi
1892025-05-22T16:00:27 <johnny9dev> hi
1902025-05-22T16:00:31 <TheCharlatan> hi
1912025-05-22T16:00:41 <vasild> #here
1922025-05-22T16:00:47 <cfields> hi
1932025-05-22T16:01:01 <achow101> There are 2 preproposed meeting topics this week. Any last minute ones to add?
1942025-05-22T16:01:02 <furszy> hi
1952025-05-22T16:01:04 <instagibbs> hi
1962025-05-22T16:01:04 <Murch[m]> Hi
1972025-05-22T16:01:09 <stickies-v> hi
1982025-05-22T16:01:38 <jon_atack> hi
1992025-05-22T16:01:43 <achow101> #topic Kernel WG Update (TheCharlatan)
2002025-05-22T16:01:49 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:f6:4da:44eb:c825> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2012025-05-22T16:01:58 <purpleKarrot> hi
2022025-05-22T16:02:05 <TheCharlatan> We've been having more directional conversations on the role of the library within the project, whether it should include the mempool, and whether the library could eventually be split out into a separate repository.
2032025-05-22T16:02:53 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
2042025-05-22T16:02:58 <TheCharlatan> I'll try to have some demo repositories / draft PRs open about these topics over the next few weeks.
2052025-05-22T16:03:03 <glozow> hi
2062025-05-22T16:03:08 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2072025-05-22T16:03:15 <TheCharlatan> Other than that, looking for review on #32317 and #31382.
2082025-05-22T16:03:19 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32317 | kernel: Separate UTXO set access from validation functions by TheCharlatan · Pull Request #32317 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2092025-05-22T16:03:21 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31382 | kernel: Flush in ChainstateManager destructor by TheCharlatan · Pull Request #31382 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2102025-05-22T16:03:25 <TheCharlatan> that's all :)
2112025-05-22T16:03:26 <willcl-ark> Hi
2122025-05-22T16:03:40 <achow101> #topic Cluster Mempool WG Update (sdaftuar, sipa)
2132025-05-22T16:04:27 <sipa> Getting some review on the next PR in the txgraph land, #31553 (3rd out of 4, after that the full cluster mempool is likely unblocked)
2142025-05-22T16:04:30 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31553 | cluster mempool: add TxGraph reorg functionality by sipa · Pull Request #31553 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2152025-05-22T16:04:48 <instagibbs> DoWork one is necessary I presume?
2162025-05-22T16:05:00 <sipa> yeah, that's the 4th one
2172025-05-22T16:05:06 <instagibbs> ðack
2182025-05-22T16:05:44 <sipa> I have also opened #32545, to replace the existing linearization algorithm with SFL (spanning forest linearization), a drop in replacement which apparently performs far better on hard clusters
2192025-05-22T16:05:45 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32545 | Replace cluster linearization algorithm with SFL by sipa · Pull Request #32545 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2202025-05-22T16:06:05 <sipa> There are some links to the delving posts with motivation and benchmarks.
2212025-05-22T16:06:28 <sipa> That's it from me.
2222025-05-22T16:06:42 <achow101> #topic MuSig2 WG Update (achow101, rkrux)
2232025-05-22T16:06:55 <achow101> #31622 has been merged, we're down to 2 PRs left in this project
2242025-05-22T16:07:01 <corebot> achow101: Error: That URL raised <Connection timed out.>
2252025-05-22T16:07:03 <achow101> The next PR to review is #31244 which has been getting some review over the past few weeks.
2262025-05-22T16:07:07 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31244 | descriptors: MuSig2 by achow101 · Pull Request #31244 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2272025-05-22T16:07:11 <achow101> The final PR, #29675, is fully rebased and up to date if anyone wants to test that out or if it will help with reviewing 31244.
2282025-05-22T16:07:14 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29675 | wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys by achow101 · Pull Request #29675 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2292025-05-22T16:07:25 <achow101> #topic orphan resolution WG Update (glozow)
2302025-05-22T16:07:38 <glozow> I've pushed to #31829 and it is ready for review. It includes the multi-index reimplementation and the new eviction strategies we discussed at coredev. I think it's fine as 1 PR, but open to ideas on reorganizing/splitting.
2312025-05-22T16:07:41 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31829 | p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds and increase -maxorphantxs by glozow · Pull Request #31829 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2322025-05-22T16:08:04 <sipa> cool, will look
2332025-05-22T16:08:32 <glozow> I talked to marcofleon today about adding a fuzzer for checking that 1p1cs always propagate regardless of spammy peers. But there are various tests etc on that PR as well
2342025-05-22T16:08:38 <glozow> sipa: thanks!
2352025-05-22T16:08:55 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
2362025-05-22T16:08:58 <glozow> that's it from me
2372025-05-22T16:09:13 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2382025-05-22T16:09:27 <achow101> #topic QML GUI WG Update (jarolrod, johnny9dev)
2392025-05-22T16:09:32 <johnny9dev> This week we onboarded a new contributor, goqusan. He will be helping implement the QML components in the wallet views. He's starting with the receive page and added QR encoding. bitcoin-core/gui-qml#454
2402025-05-22T16:09:32 <johnny9dev> Christoph has been doing work on the Animations for the wallet and fixed the main transition easing with bitcoin-core/gui-qml#453
2412025-05-22T16:09:33 <johnny9dev> For me, I implemented the initialization states for the WalletQmlController and added the first instance of the Skeleton loading animation that Christoph proposed last week. bitcoin-core/gui-qml#454
2422025-05-22T16:09:33 <johnny9dev> This following week we'll be focused on getting bitcoin-core/gui-qml#450 mergable, implementing more of the Receive page, and adding input validation and error strings on to the Send page.
2432025-05-22T16:09:34 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/issues/454 | Add QRImageProvider by goqusan · Pull Request #454 · bitcoin-core/gui-qml · GitHub
2442025-05-22T16:09:35 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/issues/453 | Change PageStack easing type to InOutCubic by GBKS · Pull Request #453 · bitcoin-core/gui-qml · GitHub
2452025-05-22T16:09:36 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/issues/454 | Add QRImageProvider by goqusan · Pull Request #454 · bitcoin-core/gui-qml · GitHub
2462025-05-22T16:09:37 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/issues/450 | Add Multiple Recipients option to the Send form by johnny9 · Pull Request #450 · bitcoin-core/gui-qml · GitHub
2472025-05-22T16:10:27 <achow101> #topic project-related MSVC bug reports (hebasto)
2482025-05-22T16:10:35 <hebasto> Hi everyone! This is a short announcement.
2492025-05-22T16:10:40 <hebasto> To compile Bitcoin Core on Windows, there is currently only one supported option: MSVC.
2502025-05-22T16:10:45 <hebasto> As with any other compiler, the development process exposes regressions and new bugs in MSVC.
2512025-05-22T16:10:51 <hebasto> However, the process of improving MSVC, from reporting an issue to applying a fix, differs significantly from that of open-source compilers.
2522025-05-22T16:10:56 <hebasto> To improve our chances, I encourage anyone with a microsoft account to consider upvoting issue reports related to Bitcoin Core.
2532025-05-22T16:11:01 <hebasto> Here is a link to current issues, as well as some that have been closed: https://gist.github.com/hebasto/aa42915f88faa4a0ee02655bb55ee624
2542025-05-22T16:11:07 <hebasto> That's it. Thank you!
2552025-05-22T16:11:51 <sipa> Does mingw-w64 building not work on Windows?
2562025-05-22T16:12:10 <fanquake> You could just use that with the windows subsystem for linux yes
2572025-05-22T16:12:13 <hebasto> from within WSL
2582025-05-22T16:12:31 <achow101> but not natively with like cygwin or similar?
2592025-05-22T16:12:55 <fanquake> I'd encourage devs to do that in any case, so they are actually testing what we are shipping to users
2602025-05-22T16:13:49 <hebasto> we tested only MSVC native builds
2612025-05-22T16:13:58 <gmaxwell> If it was good enough for Satoshi... ;)
2622025-05-22T16:15:15 <achow101> #topic Statement on transaction relay policy (sipa)
2632025-05-22T16:16:02 <sipa> Hi.
2642025-05-22T16:16:21 <cfields> ð
2652025-05-22T16:16:38 <sipa> I've written a short statement about the relation between Bitcoin Core developments and transaction relay policy, with the help of darosior and glozow
2662025-05-22T16:16:44 <sipa> https://gist.github.com/sipa/2521731e65ba779e3ce9f9305c6a538c
2672025-05-22T16:17:50 <achow101> planning to post to the website?
2682025-05-22T16:17:57 <sipa> I think it would be useful to publish something like this, possibly on the bitcoincore.org website if enough people agree
2692025-05-22T16:18:04 <darosior> Ack.
2702025-05-22T16:18:04 <sipa> but i'm open to hearing opinions
2712025-05-22T16:19:12 <achow101> will review
2722025-05-22T16:19:18 <gmaxwell> I couldn't remember if the project had every blocked a widespread active use. The closest I could find is the dust limit stuff, but that seemed to go in after the penny dust had pretty much stopped AFAICT.
2732025-05-22T16:19:25 <gmaxwell> s/every/ever/
2742025-05-22T16:19:51 <stickies-v> very nice statement, will think of suggestions but ack for me too, thank you all for writing this up
2752025-05-22T16:20:05 <sipa> So, what do people think... have a short period for comments, and then ask who would be willing to put their name under it?
2762025-05-22T16:20:14 <dzxzg> "Within transaction relay, this may include adding policies for DoS protection and fee assessment, but not blocking relay of transactions that have sustained economic demand and reliably make it into blocks." I agree with this, but it seems to beg the question, how is demand weighed against DoS potential?
2772025-05-22T16:20:38 <sliv3r__> nice statement
2782025-05-22T16:20:46 <sipa> dzxzg: thankfully not a question i feel like we've had to answer yet, but a day may come
2792025-05-22T16:21:04 <instagibbs> DoS here doesn't mean usage of blockspace you don't like, but cpu/memory/etc
2802025-05-22T16:21:23 <gmaxwell> in any case, I think it's a very nice statement, and it feels very much in the tradition of the values I always understood coming from the project.
2812025-05-22T16:21:26 <sipa> right, exactly
2822025-05-22T16:21:29 <instagibbs> may be important to spell that out
2832025-05-22T16:21:33 <achow101> sipa: maybe a week for comments, and next week we can discuss posting to the website and who wants to put their name on it?
2842025-05-22T16:21:37 <fanquake> I'm not sure that having a list of names below is going to be beneficial, or is actually needed?
2852025-05-22T16:21:43 <darosior> sipa: re what do people think, maybe open a PR on the website for comments?
2862025-05-22T16:21:44 <jon_atack> fanquake: agree
2872025-05-22T16:21:47 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
2882025-05-22T16:21:55 <jon_atack> sipa: well done
2892025-05-22T16:21:59 <glozow> I think this can be opened as a PR to the website
2902025-05-22T16:22:04 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2912025-05-22T16:22:21 <TheCharlatan> "> Note that this is not condoning non-financial data block space usage." this is what the issue seems to boil down to for users of Bitcoin Core, but I feel like this is not clear enough.
2922025-05-22T16:22:41 <sipa> glozow: right now? that would make suggesting corrections easy
2932025-05-22T16:22:43 <abubakarsadiq> nicely written, ack
2942025-05-22T16:23:18 <sipa> TheCharlatan: happy to hear ideas on making it clearer, but i'm also weary of going into too much detail
2952025-05-22T16:23:20 <glozow> sipa: I think so, given people are writing their comments here for specific lines. Perhaps worth doing this review process on the PR
2962025-05-22T16:23:25 <darosior> I would say yes because i don't see how waiting before opening the PR to the website would help
2972025-05-22T16:23:26 <dzxzg> instagibbs: Sure, whatever you take it to mean, the question would still stand. What if bare multisig outputs were to become popular? But I agree with sipa that maybe this question can be postponed for if/when it arrives
2982025-05-22T16:23:54 <fanquake> (if nobody wants their name attached, would we post it anyway? I'd like to think yes, if it represents the software we are shipping)
2992025-05-22T16:23:59 <glozow> dzxzg: I don't think bare multisig is a good example of DoS vs demand. Perhaps gigantic transacttions?
3002025-05-22T16:24:03 <gmaxwell> dzxzg: those don't fall under the dos banner (uh except related to sigops limit?)
3012025-05-22T16:24:06 <instagibbs> dzxzg bare multisig isn't a DoS (except for jank sigops counting), but sure if some new thing came up it would have to be weighed independently
3022025-05-22T16:24:13 <gmaxwell> instagibbs++
3032025-05-22T16:24:14 <sliv3r__> won't it end up an open PR like datacarriers' ones?
3042025-05-22T16:24:26 <gmaxwell> dzxzg: DOS obviously means to me things like quadratic hashing.
3052025-05-22T16:24:35 <instagibbs> like, if dust was being completely ignored (eep)
3062025-05-22T16:25:00 <sipa> dzxzg: bare multisig is standard (up to 3 pubkeys), but even if bigger multisig were to become common, my personal opinion would be to relax the policy - it's not DoSy in any way, only (perhaps subjectively) dumb
3072025-05-22T16:25:20 <gmaxwell> dzxzg: the closest to 'usage' I see DOS going might be dusting attacks. but generally I expect DOS to mean memory/algorithimic non-linearities.
3082025-05-22T16:25:23 <dzxzg> I thought bare multisig had a DoS issue, my mistake.
3092025-05-22T16:25:26 <instagibbs> block building gets annoying, as certain pools have found ð¬
3102025-05-22T16:25:32 <gmaxwell> sipa: except for sigop counting.
3112025-05-22T16:25:37 <darosior> The question of DoS is interesting and i remember discussing it with some other contributors, but debating it now is off topic i think
3122025-05-22T16:25:45 <sipa> ah, and bare multisig of course has higher UTXO set impact
3132025-05-22T16:25:52 <sipa> that's perhaps a legitimate concern
3142025-05-22T16:26:05 <sipa> yeah, seems a bit of tangent today
3152025-05-22T16:26:11 <achow101> fanquake: I think the point of having individual names is because it should be perceived as a statement made with group support. possibly there are contributors who disagree with it and would not want their name to be on it, which would be less clear if there was not a list of names attached?
3162025-05-22T16:26:13 <gmaxwell> sipa: because dumb consenssus rules count sigops in OUTPUTS...
3172025-05-22T16:26:17 <Murch[m]> sipa: Especially due to its use for stamps and them getting spent at an uncommonly low rate
3182025-05-22T16:26:24 <gmaxwell> I actually think clarifying dos would be nice and important, but it might not be possible.
3192025-05-22T16:26:28 <dzxzg> Sure, I didn't mean to debate it, I was just sharing a question that I had reading the document, sorry for pushing off-topic
3202025-05-22T16:26:43 <instagibbs> gmaxwell ++ yeah just saying
3212025-05-22T16:26:43 <stickies-v> attaching names could be powerful but only if a large number of contributors are willing to do so, otherwise it could have the opposite effect
3222025-05-22T16:26:45 <gmaxwell> The first three alternatives I considered were worse. "to address vulnerablities in the software or protocol" -- worse.
3232025-05-22T16:26:47 <fanquake> achow101: right, but if you end up with, for example, 4 names, that'd be a weird thing to post
3242025-05-22T16:26:47 <sipa> dzxzg: it is a good question, and i don't know the answer :)
3252025-05-22T16:26:48 <achow101> and I do think that if no one wanted to put their name on it, we wouldn't post it to the website
3262025-05-22T16:27:12 <Murch[m]> fanquake: I think there would be more than four names.
3272025-05-22T16:27:17 <glozow> fwiw I don't think the goal of this post is to prescribe what policy is for, I think it's just a statement to clarify a general intention to remove certain kinds of policy and why
3282025-05-22T16:27:29 <instagibbs> (or add)
3292025-05-22T16:27:38 <achow101> fanquake: yeah, there's definitely a threshold
3302025-05-22T16:27:38 <stickies-v> i'm supportive of adding my name, with the only caveat that we probably don't want to create too much precedent of having to sign off blog posts by contributors that support it
3312025-05-22T16:27:39 <Murch[m]> Happy to sign, fwiw
3322025-05-22T16:27:45 <fanquake> Murch: sure, but it's not clear what the threshhold is
3332025-05-22T16:28:04 <sipa> stickies-v: there is precedent, though very rare, and quite long ago
3342025-05-22T16:28:05 <gmaxwell> I hope there aren't significant contributors that disagree with this, if there are that should be hammered out (hammer mostly to be applied to contributor). :P
3352025-05-22T16:28:10 <achow101> also, having names would allow other people not necessarily involved in the project be able to endorse it as well
3362025-05-22T16:28:20 <jon_atack> re names, it could have consequences for those who add (naming and shaming) and for those who do not (didn't show support)
3372025-05-22T16:28:26 <darosior> I am happy to put my name on it but i agree with fanquake that it's not necessary. This what the project has always done and published binaries implementing this vision, i think it's fine to have it spelled out without necessarily stating who agrees explicitly or not
3382025-05-22T16:28:28 <rkrux> +1 for opening a PR - I'd review it, don't mind signing it
3392025-05-22T16:28:33 <fanquake> gmaxwell: that's kind of why I think the names are redundant
3402025-05-22T16:28:33 <cfields> achow101: I don't see anything I disagree with, but I also don't feel as though my signature adds any value here. I'm not sure individual names are necessary.
3412025-05-22T16:28:36 <gmaxwell> achow101: maybe better to just have another thing where people can lodge their support.
3422025-05-22T16:28:37 <jon_atack> omitting the names would avoid that
3432025-05-22T16:28:48 <fanquake> if people didn't agree, we'd have a PR, with enough ACKs, to change the software
3442025-05-22T16:28:57 <fanquake> and then the project would ship something different
3452025-05-22T16:29:17 <fanquake> If that's not the case, then what we are shipping represents the views of the project
3462025-05-22T16:29:28 <cfields> yeah, releases with policy changes don't come with statements/signatures :)
3472025-05-22T16:29:32 <fanquake> so it seems like any statement on the website, can be from the project, collectively
3482025-05-22T16:29:36 <Murch[m]> Iâm also fine with presenting this as the view of the project
3492025-05-22T16:29:56 <stickies-v> the only reason in this case i'd be supportive of adding names is that it seems some people have a perception of maintainers / some contributors being almighty, and adding names helps show that it's not just a cabal pushing this but has widespread support among contributors
3502025-05-22T16:30:04 <darosior> fanquake: +1
3512025-05-22T16:30:14 <glozow> I also don't know if signatures are worth putting - people who want to personally endorse it can post it on social media? I think this post can follow our typical governance process for things that go onto the website. If people are strongly opposed then maybe we can have a conversation about something more granular than on/off website.
3522025-05-22T16:30:19 <achow101> stickies-v: yes, that
3532025-05-22T16:30:19 <stickies-v> but agreed with fanquake that it absolutely shouldn't be necessary
3542025-05-22T16:30:21 <gmaxwell> I can say that in the little contribution I've been doing in public outreach I'd like to be able to say that it went in without any opposition from the regular contributors.
3552025-05-22T16:30:30 <sipa> i feel there is a bit of a philosophical difference, in that releases represent the contributors' agreement at this very moment, while a post like this is a longer-term vision - and it's good to recognize that it's still a vision of specific people, and the set of people can change over time
3562025-05-22T16:30:36 <cfields> maybe fanning the flames, but something like this could potenially be PRd to Core as a guideline, and referenced/copied on the website for visibility.
3572025-05-22T16:30:43 <Murch[m]> And the threshold thing cuts the opposite way. If a couple minor contributors disagree, would we still publish etc?
3582025-05-22T16:30:52 <gmaxwell> cfields+1.
3592025-05-22T16:30:58 <gmaxwell> Murch[m]: they can also be asked to leave.
3602025-05-22T16:31:12 <gmaxwell> There is nothing wrong with people having a different vision!
3612025-05-22T16:31:37 <darosior> sipa: people's vision change, i don't think why we should expect a blog post to reflect someone's future vision more so than a binary
3622025-05-22T16:32:01 <gmaxwell> presumably if this understanding gets change the document should be amended/marked historical.
3632025-05-22T16:32:09 <lightlike> gmaxwell: why would they be asked to leave - there is nothing wrong with people withing the project having a different vision imo
3642025-05-22T16:32:11 <glozow> there can be a sentence saying "this only reflects the views of the *current* contributors" etc
3652025-05-22T16:32:18 *** rkrux <rkrux!~rkrux@user/rkrux> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
3662025-05-22T16:32:41 <instagibbs> If your work doesn't touch relay (most don't), I don't know why it would be an issue
3672025-05-22T16:32:42 *** rkrux <rkrux!~rkrux@user/rkrux> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3682025-05-22T16:32:57 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:3ccd:106:9de6:2711> has quit IRC (Quit: Christoph_)
3692025-05-22T16:33:06 <gmaxwell> lightlike: sometimes, sometimes not! depends on their approach. e.g. having a different view is fine, but not if it's in the form of being obstructionist. Some people historically around the project have had difficulty with that.
3702025-05-22T16:33:11 <darosior> lightlike: depends on the compatibility of their vision, the specific things they disagree with, etc.. It's a case by case basis and in any ways i think someone that disagree with everybody else would leave without needing to be asked
3712025-05-22T16:33:21 <gmaxwell> hahaha
3722025-05-22T16:33:24 <sliv3r__> glozow: that + the date I think would work
3732025-05-22T16:33:41 <gmaxwell> but anyways, I apologize for starting a tangent.
3742025-05-22T16:33:47 <achow101> the point of having names is to shape how people will perceive the post, and I think that having the names of people who have not been actively participating in the discussion would help bolster the point that it is actually an opinion of many people in the project, not something being "forced" onto the project
3752025-05-22T16:34:06 <achow101> (and it seems highly likely that people not actively participating in the discussion would put their names on it, based on this discussion)
3762025-05-22T16:34:15 <Murch[m]> darosior: If only ;)
3772025-05-22T16:34:27 <gmaxwell> unfortunately most of the public has no idea who many people are, so unless you're gonna list them along side git blame LOC percentages...
3782025-05-22T16:34:29 <glozow> I'm a little wary of enumerating the people that twitter should channel hatred towards
3792025-05-22T16:34:46 <jon_atack> glozow: yep
3802025-05-22T16:34:50 <gmaxwell> (As I learned when public comments where accusing me and bluematt of having no idea of how compactblocks works... :P )
3812025-05-22T16:34:57 <sipa> gmaxwell: hahaha
3822025-05-22T16:35:36 <darosior> I don't think having names is a good idea, but i also don't feel strongly. Whichever the author chooses.
3832025-05-22T16:35:39 <achow101> I think it's also not a good assumption to expect people to understand how ACK/NACKs work with merging changes to both the software and the website
3842025-05-22T16:36:12 <sipa> gmaxwell: i think you're right in that "being able to say that it went it without opposition from regular contributors" is important, perhaps more important than having actual names on it
3852025-05-22T16:36:14 <instagibbs> names could also be on the PR via ACK, then not on website, halfway ð¤·
3862025-05-22T16:36:19 <Murch[m]> gmaxwell: To which you obviously replied "Do you have any idea who I am?"
3872025-05-22T16:36:46 <gmaxwell> sipa: right I mean that's the point that I think would matter in my discussions.
3882025-05-22T16:37:13 <sipa> ok, will open PR on website, without list of signatories for now, but can be discussed further there
3892025-05-22T16:37:14 <gmaxwell> Murch[m]: I really try to not do that ever. holy crap. what a gross thing to do. I did one time say "don't you know who HE is" pointing at pieter, however. :P
3902025-05-22T16:37:30 <Murch[m]> sorry, that was a joke about Charles Hoskinson
3912025-05-22T16:37:37 <sipa> The first of his name.
3922025-05-22T16:37:40 <darosior> lol
3932025-05-22T16:37:40 <gmaxwell> oh really hah
3942025-05-22T16:37:41 <instagibbs> Murch[m] oh you need metamask help??
3952025-05-22T16:37:45 <instagibbs> dm me
3962025-05-22T16:37:52 <ajonas> instagibbs: To better anticipate objections (if any), did you get pushback from your write up? Obviously not the same thing, but you were asked to do that for the group.
3972025-05-22T16:38:06 <instagibbs> ajonas we didn't converge on a unified voice in our little group
3982025-05-22T16:38:08 <glozow> I think we should review wording on the PR, not do signatures, aim to get a lot of (concept) ACKs, perhaps more than normal (text is easier than code review right?), and then merge when we have rough consensus. The people who ACK'd are supporting it in a public place, which imo is enough.
3992025-05-22T16:38:28 <cfields> People will most definitely conflate the a signature on statement with an ACK to the policy changes btw. The former I feel qualified to do, but not the latter. I agree with the guiding principles laid out in the post, but lack the expertise to judge the specific changes. So I'm +1 for no names.
4002025-05-22T16:38:28 <instagibbs> ajonas it's also possible I'm just weak willed and gave up early
4012025-05-22T16:38:39 <ajonas> instagibbs: that's tracks
4022025-05-22T16:38:42 <gmaxwell> so a problem you will face on the PR is that a lot of total randos will show up and throw mud at it unproductively.
4032025-05-22T16:38:55 <gmaxwell> And then there will be false implications that the project didn't broadly support it.
4042025-05-22T16:39:12 <gmaxwell> Sorry I don't have a solution, but I almost guarentee this will happen.
4052025-05-22T16:39:37 <darosior> Agree with what glozow suggests
4062025-05-22T16:39:44 <achow101> gmaxwell: put a comment at the top "if you don't contribute to this project, your comment will be deleted"
4072025-05-22T16:39:54 <sipa> gmaxwell: sgtm
4082025-05-22T16:39:57 <sipa> eh
4092025-05-22T16:39:59 <sipa> glozow: sgtm
4102025-05-22T16:39:59 <gmaxwell> can you limit a PR to project members? (obviously contributors are wider...)
4112025-05-22T16:40:12 <glozow> perhaps unpopular opinion, but maybe the website repo should have stricter contribution requirements than the bitcoin/bitcoin repo
4122025-05-22T16:40:27 <glozow> achow101: yeah or that
4132025-05-22T16:40:37 <achow101> there is a roundabout way to make conversation locking let contributors comment, but it requires giving everyone write access
4142025-05-22T16:40:42 <gmaxwell> glozow: historically website has had some good help from people who aren't developers, though I agree with that view.
4152025-05-22T16:40:46 <gmaxwell> ugh, damn github.
4162025-05-22T16:40:58 <achow101> for the website, I think that's probably fine though since deploying the site has several extra steps that happen off github
4172025-05-22T16:41:16 <glozow> gmaxwell: yeah agree. but I think it's perfectly reasonable that this particular PR only seeks input from regular contributors
4182025-05-22T16:41:29 <glozow> seek*
4192025-05-22T16:41:38 <Murch[m]> And just like predicted, the brigading now lead to development channels becoming more permissioned :p
4202025-05-22T16:41:41 <achow101> we can also turn on the "have contributed to this repo before" limit, but that actually probably excludes many regular contributors
4212025-05-22T16:41:54 <sliv3r__> what about the statement without names + pgp signatures?
4222025-05-22T16:41:59 <gmaxwell> glozow: yes exactly. It's their statement not anyone elses. supportive comments (like mine!) I hope are welcome but could be channeled via recent contributors.
4232025-05-22T16:42:29 <achow101> sliv3r__: that's the same thing, but with more friction?
4242025-05-22T16:42:36 <Murch[m]> sliv3r__: Thatâs just extra work on the person that writes the scathing investigative breaking news Twitter article :p
4252025-05-22T16:42:48 <glozow> Murch[m]: I get what you're saying and generally agree, but this post isn't development at all. It's contributors agreeing on wording!
4262025-05-22T16:43:06 <Murch[m]> glozow: Fair enough
4272025-05-22T16:43:28 <Murch[m]> Also, I think it would be easier to lock it to contributors than to delete non-contributors
4282025-05-22T16:43:38 <fanquake> I've found the setting that should limit the interaction to people in the frequent contribs group
4292025-05-22T16:43:41 <Murch[m]> Maybe "easier" is the wrong word, but less abrasive
4302025-05-22T16:43:44 <fanquake> Don't think we need to hand out write access
4312025-05-22T16:43:52 <achow101> fanquake: which setting?
4322025-05-22T16:43:55 <gmaxwell> The delete has some bad effects which I can discuss later cause its a total tangent.
4332025-05-22T16:44:23 <gmaxwell> sipa: authors could also just offer to forward on any comments from contributors that have issues getting to the repo.
4342025-05-22T16:44:29 <achow101> fanquake: oh, limit to prior contributors does include org members, so I guess that would be fine too
4352025-05-22T16:44:36 <fanquake> achow101: we should be able to restrict to collaborators, where collaborators are in frequent contributors
4362025-05-22T16:44:47 <achow101> fanquake: collaborators == write access
4372025-05-22T16:45:04 <achow101> (it's stupid, and everyone gets tripped up on this)
4382025-05-22T16:45:13 <darosior> Create a Github team, just a third group for maintainers to manage and keep in sync /s
4392025-05-22T16:45:21 <fanquake> i can add that team with read access?
4402025-05-22T16:45:26 <fanquake> No write access needed
4412025-05-22T16:45:27 *** rkrux <rkrux!~rkrux@user/rkrux> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
4422025-05-22T16:45:37 <achow101> fanquake: I don't think they count as collaborators to github
4432025-05-22T16:46:25 <fanquake> 1 sec
4442025-05-22T16:46:46 <achow101> i think that's a repo-wide setting
4452025-05-22T16:46:48 <fanquake> can everyone still interact here: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org
4462025-05-22T16:47:16 <fanquake> I've added frequent collaborators as a team, with read access, and restricted interaction on that repo to only collaborators
4472025-05-22T16:47:18 <darosior> fanquake: yes https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/1135#issuecomment-2901911556
4482025-05-22T16:47:26 <achow101> fanquake: that setting includes organization members too
4492025-05-22T16:47:35 <gmaxwell> I feel bad for the tangent was there anything else for the agenda? github gnoming can probably be done right after.
4502025-05-22T16:47:47 <sipa> gmaxwell: it was the last agenda item
4512025-05-22T16:47:48 <achow101> gmaxwell: yes, good point
4522025-05-22T16:47:52 <achow101> Any other topics to discuss?
4532025-05-22T16:48:51 <achow101> #endmeeting
4542025-05-22T16:48:51 <corebot> achow101: Meeting ended at 2025-05-22T16:48+0000
4552025-05-22T16:48:52 <corebot> achow101: Raw log: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-05-22_16_00.log.json
4562025-05-22T16:48:53 <corebot> achow101: Formatted log: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-05-22_16_00.log.html
4572025-05-22T16:48:54 <corebot> achow101: Minutes: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-05-22_16_00.html
4582025-05-22T16:49:01 <jon_atack> achow101: can the meeting header line about #here be dropped
4592025-05-22T16:49:11 <achow101> fanquake: try again with the team removed, I think it'll still work
4602025-05-22T16:49:21 <achow101> jon_atack: not really
4612025-05-22T16:49:21 <jon_atack> unclear if we should be joining meetings with "hi" or #here
4622025-05-22T16:49:26 <jon_atack> ok
4632025-05-22T16:49:34 *** bitdex <bitdex!~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4642025-05-22T16:49:39 <achow101> it doesn't matter, both will be counted as participants
4652025-05-22T16:49:55 <fanquake> achow101: yea looks like non-org accounts are still limited, so this should work for what we want to do
4662025-05-22T16:50:00 <fanquake> If needed
4672025-05-22T16:50:24 <glozow> As a regular reminder: if you feel you should/shouldn't be on the frequent contributors list, please message a maintainer. There is no formal process or cadence / nobody is purposefully excluding people. Sometimes it's just been a while.
4682025-05-22T16:51:09 <achow101> jon_atack: it's https://github.com/pronovic/hcoop-meetbot if you want to submit a pr to them, or find the right configuration options for me to set to the turn it off. but afaik, i can't
4692025-05-22T16:51:54 <sipa> achow101: woah, i always assumed it was entirely custom
4702025-05-22T16:52:42 <achow101> sipa: that's way too much effort :p
4712025-05-22T16:53:56 <sipa> achow101: says the person who reimplemented all of apple's executable signing logic?
4722025-05-22T16:54:23 <achow101> lol
4732025-05-22T16:54:29 *** zeropoint <zeropoint!~alex@45-28-139-114.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4742025-05-22T16:55:05 <Murch[m]> gmaxwell: So, your point was that deleting peopleâs comments would allow them to collect a "victim badge" whereas not letting them post in the first place doesnât give people access to playing such games?
4752025-05-22T16:55:22 *** Emc99 <Emc99!~Emc99@212.129.83.156> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
4762025-05-22T16:55:47 <jon_atack> achow101: ok
4772025-05-22T16:55:50 <achow101> fanquake: I think we should leave turn the interaction limit on when the pr is open, i'd rather preempt the brigading rather than turning it on after the fact
4782025-05-22T16:56:33 *** hensou <hensou!~hensou@2001:818:eadb:c00:b37e:fdcd:67c0:5db3> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4792025-05-22T16:57:18 <stickies-v> hebasto: i upvoted all the unresolved MSVC issues
4802025-05-22T16:57:21 <fanquake> Yea I don't mind. We can turn it on at that point
4812025-05-22T16:57:41 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 6 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d2c9fc84e171...0a8ab559514f
4822025-05-22T16:57:42 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 11fed83 Cory Fields: threading: add LOCK_ARGS macro
4832025-05-22T16:57:42 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4c8c90b Cory Fields: validation: only create a CCheckQueueControl if it's actually going to be ...
4842025-05-22T16:57:42 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c3b0e6c Cory Fields: validation: make CCheckQueueControl's CCheckQueue non-optional
4852025-05-22T16:57:43 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32467: checkqueue: make the queue non-optional for CCheckQueueControl and drop legacy locking macro usage (master...checkqueue_control_mandatory) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32467
4862025-05-22T16:59:27 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0a8ab559514f...2df824f4e62b
4872025-05-22T16:59:28 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa07953 MarcoFalke: ci: Downgrade DEBUG=1 to -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS in centos task
4882025-05-22T16:59:28 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2df824f merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32586: ci: Downgrade DEBUG=1 to -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTION...
4892025-05-22T16:59:29 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32586: ci: Downgrade DEBUG=1 to -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS in centos task (master...2505-ci-centos-debug) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32586
4902025-05-22T16:59:35 <gmaxwell> lightlike: to clarify the 'asked to leave' comment from earlier. In watching PRs and bitcoin related traffic on social media, I've seen repeated participation from people who are overtly hostile to the project, it's activities, and contributors... including stuff that would get them immediately ejected from any professional enviroment. And while constructive criticism about proposals is
4912025-05-22T16:59:41 <gmaxwell> essential, someone who just hates the project has no business being on the repository at all. That's just not want it's for, its for the project to develop the projects software. So I was referring to that stuff, just just someone minding their business in GUI strings or what not.
4922025-05-22T17:01:52 <hebasto> stickies-v: thanks!
4932025-05-22T17:05:39 *** Talkless <Talkless!~Talkless@138.199.6.197> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4942025-05-22T17:07:05 <gmaxwell> I would hope some earnest niche contributor could agree that the resulting document is the position of _the project_ if it's not their own.
4952025-05-22T17:09:52 *** dzxzg <dzxzg!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has quit IRC ()
4962025-05-22T17:12:09 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:3ccd:106:9de6:2711> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4972025-05-22T17:18:28 <lightlike> gmaxwell: yes, i don't disagree with that. Though it should be possible for contributors to have fundamentally opposing views wrt one area such as policy (and be vocal about that, without fear of being asked to leave) - as long as they accept it if they don't get their way in the end and don't have that same problem in other areas.
4982025-05-22T17:20:01 <gmaxwell> ::nods:: that's why I thought it was useful to clarify what I was referring to.
4992025-05-22T17:28:19 <gmaxwell> The underlying principle I, personally, would keep in mind is that the repository exists so that its significant contributors can collaborate and produce the best bitcoin software they can. It does not exist to be fair, inclusive, friendly, to anyone -- except to the (very significant!) extent that those things help to produce good bitcoin software.
5002025-05-22T17:29:53 <gmaxwell> and this is my view because simply if it doesn't work that way it will be replaced with something that does. Exactly like this IRC channel, which functionally replaced #bitcoin-dev, because the other wasn't maintained in a way that preserved the participation of the major participants.
5012025-05-22T17:40:00 <gmaxwell> (and I'd recommend the fictional novel "Walkaway" by Cory Doctorow, in spite of my general reservations about his writing, for its musing on the social structures surrounding truly voluntary efforts and collaborations)
5022025-05-22T17:42:52 *** hensou <hensou!~hensou@2001:818:eadb:c00:b37e:fdcd:67c0:5db3> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
5032025-05-22T17:51:32 <bitcoin-git> [gui-qml] hebasto pushed 4 commits to main: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/compare/849d3ae81714...b411e5894145
5042025-05-22T17:51:33 <bitcoin-git> gui-qml/main 33c0467 goqusan: qml: Add QRImageProvider
5052025-05-22T17:51:33 <bitcoin-git> gui-qml/main 53788b6 goqusan: qml: Add QRImage control
5062025-05-22T17:51:33 <bitcoin-git> gui-qml/main f445e65 goqusan: qml: Use QRImage in RequestPayment
5072025-05-22T17:51:34 <bitcoin-git> [gui-qml] hebasto merged pull request #454: Add QRImageProvider (main...qrimageprovider) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/pull/454
5082025-05-22T18:02:53 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:3ccd:106:9de6:2711> has quit IRC (Quit: Christoph_)
5092025-05-22T18:06:18 <gmaxwell> Murch[m]: right. like encountering a closed door might make you sad, but being heaved out the door makes some people feel humilitated and turns them into long term enemies even when it should have been totally expected.
5102025-05-22T18:07:53 *** hensou <hensou!~hensou@2001:818:eadb:c00:8a2d:182:4034:89d7> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5112025-05-22T18:09:28 <lightlike> gmaxwell: that is certainly what open source projects in general should default to - but even if in theory everyone can run their own software, in practice bitcoin core is still the de-facto reference implementation, which makes it a bit unique. As long as most other node impls are not serious alternatives I'd argue that implies at least some additional responsibilities other projects don't have - only up to some point though (e.g. we
5122025-05-22T18:09:29 <lightlike> certainly should not merge things we think are harmful even if everyone else wants them), and it's not clear to me where that point should be.
5132025-05-22T18:11:55 <gmaxwell> I think I feel somewhat the opposite, the whole point of bitcoin is defeated if other people control your usage. So trying to act like a pseudogovernment isn't in Bitcoin's interest, as some people will mistake the pomp and circumstance of power with actual power that should not and must not exist.
5142025-05-22T18:12:59 <gmaxwell> I mean obviously there is no point in doing it if people don't actually want to run the result (and development in the project wouldn't continue if people stopped using it-- if people didn't want to work on an impactful system they wouldn't be here, it's so much harder than something inconsequential)
5152025-05-22T18:13:00 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #32592: threading: remove ancient CRITICAL_SECTION macros (master...remove-critsect) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32592
5162025-05-22T18:13:04 *** hensou <hensou!~hensou@2001:818:eadb:c00:8a2d:182:4034:89d7> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
5172025-05-22T18:14:55 <gmaxwell> So I agree to you to at least that extent. But I've absolutely seen it go wrong, including e.g. one coinbase filing in litigation explaining that bitcoin was decenteralized because anyone can make a pull request. ... and I don't really blame coinbase, it's easy to see how the very elaborate pesudogovernmental procedures in the project got mistaken for the origin of Bitcoin's properties.
5182025-05-22T18:16:47 <gmaxwell> So at least for that specific purpose, it would have been better if contributing.md just said "Stuff goes in here if Achow likes it, you can use this repo if you like it, otherwise take a hike" :P ... cause if coinbases lawyers saw that they'd go okay obviously *this* isn't where bitcoin's properties arise. And instead would have made the case that no one controls the software users run and in
5192025-05-22T18:16:53 <gmaxwell> fact significant effort has gone into preserving/amplifying that power.
5202025-05-22T18:21:47 <gmaxwell> lightlike: re serious alternatives: the code the user is running *right now* is a serious alternative to a future release. A future release with whatever adverse change backed out is a serious alternative -- even a moderately technical user can now reverse apply a diff and build bitcoin core with the help of an LLM. :) And of course people will make alternatives. And especially if the issue
5212025-05-22T18:21:53 <gmaxwell> of concern is substantive the alternatives will be competent.
5222025-05-22T18:22:38 <gmaxwell> The fact that the current alternatives aren't so impressive is just a product that they are driven by their own motivations that don't have much/anything to do with specific bad choices in bitcoin core.
5232025-05-22T18:25:16 <gmaxwell> one of the few positive oppturnities in this recent turmoil I think is an chance for people to learn to apply a diff and run a patched copy. That's a skill that any serious bitcoin power user ought to have. and while (IMO) completely unjustified for the current issue, it's exactly what people might need to do in the face of an adverse change.
5242025-05-22T18:26:29 <darosior> Lol at the pull request comment. Really hits home, interacted with so many confused people fetishizing them.
5252025-05-22T18:27:01 <gmaxwell> 'cause at the day it's not the developers being great people that protects bitcoin (thoug they are!) -- great people can still have guns held to their heads (figuritively or litterally!) or can go crazy.
5262025-05-22T18:27:20 <gmaxwell> darosior: yeah they actually copied in most of contributing.md ...
5272025-05-22T18:27:34 *** reasonableD00F <reasonableD00F!~reasonabl@31.40.215.241> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5282025-05-22T18:29:12 *** reasonableD00F <reasonableD00F!~reasonabl@31.40.215.241> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
5292025-05-22T18:29:23 <gmaxwell> I dunno how to manage it though because all this openness and inclusiveness are fantastic tools for making good software, and also important to people's good feelings towards the project. But they just simply can't be where Bitcoin's security comes from.
5302025-05-22T18:31:06 *** reasonableD00F <reasonableD00F!~reasonabl@31.40.215.241> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5312025-05-22T18:33:28 *** reasonableD00F <reasonableD00F!~reasonabl@31.40.215.241> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
5322025-05-22T18:33:36 *** hensou <hensou!~hensou@2001:818:eadb:c00:2121:ac5a:2858:e83d> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5332025-05-22T18:36:12 <gmaxwell> in BCH which has a far smaller and less resourced community, the main development group decided to add code to direct a portion of mining rewards to a development fund-- a decision they were commited to. And they were entirely replaced, by a new project that didn't exist before then. (There were other implementations, but they were mostly 1/2 person projects like the alternative
5342025-05-22T18:36:18 <gmaxwell> implementations in Bitcoin today, the thing that replaced the BCH 'reference implementation' was created in response to the adverse change)
5352025-05-22T18:36:59 <gmaxwell> so I'm entirely not worried about that. I worry more about stuff like the project becoming a zombie, like-- failing to implode when it ought to. :)
5362025-05-22T18:37:03 <cfields> jeremyrubin: do you remember why the cuckoocache requires an external lock rather than just using an internal mutex? I'm guessing because not all of the functions require locking?
5372025-05-22T18:40:50 <cfields> nm, found a github comment.
5382025-05-22T18:46:41 *** hensou <hensou!~hensou@2001:818:eadb:c00:2121:ac5a:2858:e83d> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
5392025-05-22T18:57:57 *** Guest10 <Guest10!~Guest10@196.40.180.242> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5402025-05-22T18:58:18 *** Guest10 <Guest10!~Guest10@196.40.180.242> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
5412025-05-22T19:01:38 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:f6:4da:44eb:c825> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
5422025-05-22T19:18:30 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:f6:4da:44eb:c825> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5432025-05-22T19:18:31 *** Talkless <Talkless!~Talkless@138.199.6.197> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
5442025-05-22T19:24:09 <sipa> darosior: which pull request comment?
5452025-05-22T19:25:16 <gmaxwell> my comment about coinbase attributing bitcoin's decenteralization to anyone being able to open a pull request.
5462025-05-22T19:26:25 <sipa> ah yes ok, i thought darosior was commenting about a specific PR being mentioned that i missed
5472025-05-22T19:26:37 <gmaxwell> I thought that too for a moment.
5482025-05-22T19:34:49 *** cold <cold!~cold@user/cold> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
5492025-05-22T19:34:59 *** midnight <midnight!~midnight@user/midnight> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
5502025-05-22T19:48:49 *** cold <cold!~cold@user/cold> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5512025-05-22T19:48:59 *** midnight <midnight!~midnight@user/midnight> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5522025-05-22T19:51:28 *** hensou <hensou!~hensou@2001:818:eadb:c00:d599:b41b:c9c2:a4d8> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5532025-05-22T19:52:10 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:3ccd:106:9de6:2711> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5542025-05-22T19:58:52 *** midnight <midnight!~midnight@user/midnight> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
5552025-05-22T19:59:37 *** cold <cold!~cold@user/cold> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
5562025-05-22T20:00:10 *** bugs_ <bugs_!~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603> has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
5572025-05-22T20:01:26 *** midnight <midnight!~midnight@user/midnight> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5582025-05-22T20:01:56 *** cold <cold!~cold@user/cold> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5592025-05-22T20:06:40 *** ghost43_ <ghost43_!~ghost43@gateway/tor-sasl/ghost43> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5602025-05-22T20:07:24 *** ghost43 <ghost43!~ghost43@gateway/tor-sasl/ghost43> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
5612025-05-22T20:11:27 *** abubakarsadiq <abubakarsadiq!uid602234@id-602234.hampstead.irccloud.com> has quit IRC (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
5622025-05-22T20:24:48 *** abubakarsadiq <abubakarsadiq!uid602234@id-602234.hampstead.irccloud.com> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5632025-05-22T20:29:50 *** kevkevin <kevkevin!~kevkevin@2601:243:197e:8f10:f6:4da:44eb:c825> has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
5642025-05-22T20:35:58 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #32593: wallet, rpc: Move (Un)LockCoin WalletBatch creation out of RPC (master...improve-lockcoin-interface) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32593
5652025-05-22T20:37:37 *** hensou <hensou!~hensou@2001:818:eadb:c00:d599:b41b:c9c2:a4d8> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
5662025-05-22T20:40:32 *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r167-61-220-219.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has quit IRC (Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzzâ¦)
5672025-05-22T20:43:04 *** jespada <jespada!~jespada@r167-61-220-219.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5682025-05-22T20:52:29 *** purpleKarrot <purpleKarrot!~purpleKar@user/purpleKarrot> has quit IRC (Quit: purpleKarrot)
5692025-05-22T20:52:39 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:3ccd:106:9de6:2711> has quit IRC (Quit: Christoph_)
5702025-05-22T20:52:59 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:3ccd:106:9de6:2711> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5712025-05-22T20:57:25 *** Christoph_ <Christoph_!~Christoph@2a02:810d:1399:b700:3ccd:106:9de6:2711> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
5722025-05-22T21:18:26 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #32594: Getaddrinfo normalized parent (master...getaddrinfo-normalized-parent) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32594
5732025-05-22T21:25:51 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] willcl-ark opened pull request #32595: build: add a depends dependency provider (master...cmake-dependency-provider) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32595
5742025-05-22T21:54:42 <bitcoin-git> [gui-qml] davidgumberg opened pull request #458: Add missing cstdint declarations (main...5-22-2025-cstdint-qml) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/pull/458
5752025-05-22T22:04:47 *** dzxzg <dzxzg!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5762025-05-22T22:30:00 *** dzxzg <dzxzg!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
5772025-05-22T22:30:16 *** dzxzg <dzxzg!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5782025-05-22T22:31:00 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
5792025-05-22T22:31:18 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5802025-05-22T22:31:52 *** w473rm3l0n <w473rm3l0n!~w473rm3l0@user/w473rm3l0n> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5812025-05-22T22:36:22 *** Guest47 <Guest47!~Guest47@2405:4803:fd23:a050:e908:e94b:fe23:9aeb> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5822025-05-22T22:40:10 *** Guest47 <Guest47!~Guest47@2405:4803:fd23:a050:e908:e94b:fe23:9aeb> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
5832025-05-22T22:46:34 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theStack opened pull request #32596: wallet, rpc, doc: various legacy wallet removal cleanups in RPCs (master...2025-wallet-rpc-related_legacy_wallet_cleanups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32596
5842025-05-22T22:46:49 *** sliv3r__ <sliv3r__!~sliv3r__@user/sliv3r-:76883> has quit IRC (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2+deb3.1+deb12u1 - https://znc.in)
5852025-05-22T22:47:14 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
5862025-05-22T22:47:32 *** Cory80 <Cory80!~Cory80@user/pasha> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5872025-05-22T22:47:44 *** sliv3r__ <sliv3r__!~sliv3r__@user/sliv3r-:76883> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5882025-05-22T22:48:40 <Earnestly> (It's interesting to me that during this topic discussion there was total agreement, there were no dissenting voices despite so much contention (I've been reading more about it).)
5892025-05-22T22:51:53 <w473rm3l0n> sipa: re: relay_policy.md, I agree with everything written in the gist. Although it doesn't contain anything new that users haven't already read several times. The only thing that makes it different is that it would be on the core website and likely posted by core's X account.
5902025-05-22T22:52:05 <w473rm3l0n> Another factor that could set it apart is if it's signed by developers who are respected in the community and avoid controversies, drama etc.
5912025-05-22T22:52:59 <w473rm3l0n> Restricting the pull request will only add fuel to the fire. Instead, changes can be suggested in the gist. A pull request can then be opened and merged with some ACKs from regular contributors.
5922025-05-22T22:53:51 <w473rm3l0n> I don't think any such post will make a difference, because some people are unhappy with the way bitcoin core development works and their concerns or perception go beyond just OP_RETURN.
5932025-05-22T22:54:29 <Earnestly> That is my perception too, OP_RETURN appears to be the last few straws
5942025-05-22T22:55:05 <Earnestly> The gist covers 3 main points, which many people have already seen, discussed, refuted/challenged, etc. The gist doesn't really add anything new
5952025-05-22T22:56:06 <Earnestly> (I.e. 1) fee estimation, 2) block prop, 3) avoiding miners using dark pools)
5962025-05-22T22:57:53 *** w473rm3l0n79 <w473rm3l0n79!~w473rm3l0@user/w473rm3l0n> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5972025-05-22T22:57:53 *** w473rm3l0n79 <w473rm3l0n79!~w473rm3l0@user/w473rm3l0n> has quit IRC (Client Quit)
5982025-05-22T22:59:24 <Earnestly> From my brief reading of the situation many of the anti-core voices largely think exactly what the gist contains; they don't think core is malicous (some do, ignore) but misguided. Ultimately what I personally think they want is core to /signal/ an anti-spam stance, which core likely does not want to do
5992025-05-22T23:00:23 <Earnestly> The logic being that a signal will have a social effect on vc funding of spam activity, preventing them from becoming self-sustaining
6002025-05-22T23:05:05 <Earnestly> (Also I'd suggest dropping the language of "brigading", and the pathologysing of users who have grievances, here and elsewhere too. People do see it.)
6012025-05-22T23:05:21 <Earnestly> gising*
6022025-05-22T23:08:01 *** w473rm3l0n <w473rm3l0n!~w473rm3l0@user/w473rm3l0n> has quit IRC (Quit: Client closed)
6032025-05-22T23:40:21 *** dzxzg <dzxzg!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has quit IRC (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
6042025-05-22T23:40:28 *** dzxzg2 <dzxzg2!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6052025-05-22T23:47:19 *** dzxzg2 <dzxzg2!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
6062025-05-22T23:50:26 *** dzxzg2 <dzxzg2!~dzxzg@user/dzxzg> has joined #bitcoin-core-dev