--- Day changed Wed Mar 16 2016
00:40 -!- gribble [~gribble@unaffiliated/nanotube/bot/gribble] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:44 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-azboyycbtwyfpxwn] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:47 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@c-68-34-102-231.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
00:50 -!- gribble [~gribble@unaffiliated/nanotube/bot/gribble] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:50 -!- Thireus [~Thireus@vps-92.197.170.217.stwvps.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
01:00 -!- JackH [~Jack@host-2-103-125-30.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:09 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:10 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:11 -!- Thireus [~Thireus@vps-92.197.170.217.stwvps.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:14 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
01:16 -!- slackircbridge [~slackircb@45.55.41.36] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:17 -!- slackircbridge [~slackircb@45.55.41.36] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:21 -!- cjcj [82ebca3a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.130.235.202.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
01:22 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:27 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
01:30 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:36 -!- cjcj [82ebca3a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.130.235.202.58] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:36 -!- Tasoshi [~Tasoshi@unaffiliated/tasoshi] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
01:40 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:31 -!- cjcj [82ebca3a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.130.235.202.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
03:02 -!- randy-waterhouse [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/randy-waterhouse] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
03:21 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@128-79-141-196.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:23 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@128-79-141-196.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Client Quit]
03:39 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:40 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)]
03:48 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@217.121.233.97] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:48 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@217.121.233.97] has quit [Changing host]
03:48 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:26 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:28 -!- jtimon [~quassel@35.31.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:38 -!- murch [~murch@p4FE39668.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:51 -!- hsmiths2 [~hsmiths@cpe-76-174-26-91.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
05:52 -!- hsmiths [~hsmiths@cpe-76-174-26-91.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:15 -!- B4ckJ4ck007 [~ipalyi@213.4.200.211] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:22 -!- B4ckJ4ck007 [~ipalyi@213.4.200.211] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
06:23 -!- B4ckJ4ck007 [~ipalyi@213.4.200.211] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:23 -!- B4ckJ4ck007 [~ipalyi@213.4.200.211] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
06:24 -!- B4ckJ4ck007 [~ipalyi@213.4.200.211] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:26 -!- B4ckJ4ck007 [~ipalyi@213.4.200.211] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:26 -!- B4ckJ4ck007 [~ipalyi@213.4.200.211] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:44 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:56 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@128-79-141-196.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:56 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@128-79-141-196.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Client Quit]
07:27 < GitHub25> [bitcoin] sdaftuar opened pull request #7697: Tests: make prioritise_transaction.py more robust (master...fix-prioritise-transaction) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7697
07:28 -!- zooko [~user@50-79-43-161-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:43 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:45 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
07:45 -!- Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
07:53 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
07:59 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:06 < Chris_Stewart_5> Hi guys, I know this isn't the correct channel, but I figured some one in this channel might be able to answer my question - i've already tried #bitcoin-dev 
08:06 < Chris_Stewart_5> I'm looking at this test case from script_valid.json that is suppose to pass in core
08:06 < Chris_Stewart_5> ["0x4a 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000", "0 CHECKSIG NOT", "", "Overly long signature is correctly encoded"]
08:06 < Chris_Stewart_5> however the signature 0x00...000 isn't a valid DER signature - so why is this test case suppose to pass?
08:08 < Chris_Stewart_5> interestingly enough, that same test case is also included in script_invalid.json as well
08:09 < sipa> that test doesn't specify DERSIG as validation flag
08:09 < Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: So this is a historical test case pre BIP-66?
08:09 < sipa> or STRICTENC or LOW_S
08:09 < wumpus> intersting
08:09 < wumpus> I think he got confused by ["Increase test coverage for DERSIG"]
08:10 < sipa> Chris_Stewart_5: in a way...
08:10 < wumpus> after which none of the test cases supply the DERSIG flag :-)
08:10 < sipa> Chris_Stewart_5: the consensus rules are still well defined for historical cases
08:10 < wumpus> (some do, later on, but not under that heading)
08:10 < sipa> wumpus: compare that section to the corresponding section in script_invalid; the tests verify the difference in validity by setting/unsetting that flag
08:11 < wumpus> sipa: I believe you that it's correct, it just looks funny
08:11 < sipa> that's the typical way these tests are constructed: find the minimal set of flag difference that cause validity to change, and put one side in valid and one side in invalid
08:11 < sipa> probably deserves a comment!
08:11 < wumpus> right
08:15 < Chris_Stewart_5> thanks guys, If I am understanding this correctly, we would have to deploy another soft fork to make this signature valid again for bitcoin core nodes? Are the flags in the test case used ONLY for these test cases or is there similar flags used in bitcoin core's interpreter?
08:15 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-251-52.hot.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:16 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-251-52.hot.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:16 < sipa> Chris_Stewart_5: it would require a hard fork to make them valid again
08:16 < sipa> Chris_Stewart_5: that specific test tests the script evaluation engine, which does not know anything about consensus rules or transactions or blocks even
08:16 < sipa> so it specifies the flags for evaluation with each test
08:17 < sipa> other, higher-level tests exist that actually check whether the consensus logic evaluates things correctly
08:17 < Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: Is that right though? Obviously OP_CHECKSIG has to know about txs because they are needed for hashing to compare against the sigs?
08:17 < Chris_Stewart_5> or OP_CHECKMULTISIG
08:18 < sipa> Chris_Stewart_5: nope, it's abstracted through BaseSignatureChecker
08:18 < sipa> and then there is an implementation for that for CTransaction, but it can be used to verify signatures on other things than transactions
08:19 < Chris_Stewart_5> interesting, I"ve been trying to model something similar in Scala, i'll have to take a closer look 
08:19 < Chris_Stewart_5> I think i was just running into this problem of who knows about what (does the interpreter needs to know about txs etc..)
08:20 < sipa> there were some plans of introducing a new message signing feature based on this, so that you can do multisigs on a message, for example
08:23 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-122-14-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:27 -!- MarcoFalke [8af6020a@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.10] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:31 -!- zooko [~user@50-79-43-161-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
09:00 -!- MarcoFalke [8af6020a@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.10] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
09:14 -!- B4ckJ4ck007 [~ipalyi@213.4.200.211] has quit [Quit: B4ckJ4ck007]
09:19 -!- jtimon [~quassel@35.31.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:23 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:24 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:26 -!- jtimon [~quassel@35.31.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:29 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
09:32 < GitHub191> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a6a860796a44...3d0dfdbf9f26
09:32 < GitHub191> bitcoin/master fa3a81a MarcoFalke: [tests] Extend util_ParseMoney test case
09:32 < GitHub191> bitcoin/master fad7dc8 MarcoFalke: [qa] wallet: speed up tests
09:32 < GitHub191> bitcoin/master fa8cd46 MarcoFalke: [qa] Move create_tx() to util.py
09:32 < GitHub140> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7684: [qa] Extend tests (master...Mf1603-qaCleanup1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7684
09:48 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:07 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@128-79-141-196.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:13 -!- Thireus [~Thireus@vps-92.197.170.217.stwvps.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
10:20 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
10:22 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:34 -!- Thireus [~Thireus@vps-92.197.170.217.stwvps.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:38 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:46 < btcdrak> has anyone complained to Github about the sort order of commits on PRs?
10:47 < sipa> btcdrak: they're sorted by date
10:47 < sipa> https://help.github.com/articles/why-are-my-commits-in-the-wrong-order/
10:59 -!- MarcoFalke [8af6020a@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.10] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:02 < MarcoFalke> wumpus around?
11:06 -!- molz [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Write error: Connection reset by peer]
11:07 -!- molz [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:13 -!- wallet421 [~wallet42@172.58.104.227] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:14 < btcdrak> hunt the wumpus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGVOw8gXl6Y
11:16 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
11:24 < paveljanik> btcdrak, red ferrari started and wnt away. Ah, this was ad ;-))
11:55 -!- MarcoFalke [8af6020a@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.10] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
11:56 -!- murch [~murch@p4FE39668.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
12:05 < GitHub116> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3d0dfdbf9f26...622fe6c32f41
12:05 < GitHub116> bitcoin/master ec14339 Suhas Daftuar: Tests: make prioritise_transaction.py more robust
12:05 < GitHub116> bitcoin/master 622fe6c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7697: Tests: make prioritise_transaction.py more robust...
12:05 < GitHub103> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7697: Tests: make prioritise_transaction.py more robust (master...fix-prioritise-transaction) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7697
12:06 < CodeShark> btcdrak: the original text version in BASIC: https://youtu.be/9BsliGry-OA
12:12 -!- MarcoFalke [8af6020a@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.10] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:21 < wumpus> MarcoFalke: yes (but not for long)
12:21 < MarcoFalke> wumpus, I was wondering what you think about the patches toGetFee()
12:21 < wumpus> haven't really looked at that yet
12:21 < wumpus> most of the fee logic honestly confuses me
12:22 < MarcoFalke> Jup the current logic even has a bug
12:22 < MarcoFalke> GetFee() is not monotonic in the size
12:22 < MarcoFalke> Would be trivial to fix
12:22 < wumpus> I''m not surprised - I think we should first document what we want, then try to achieve that in the code
12:23 < MarcoFalke> So I'd prefer to keep the integer logic (truncate)
12:23 < wumpus> currently it's impossible to say if behavior is desirable or not
12:23 < MarcoFalke> morcos and jtimon suggested to make it always ceil
12:23 < wumpus> well at the very least please don't use doubles for monetary values
12:24 < wumpus> I don't have an opinion on ceil versus floor, that'd at most make a satoshi difference I guess?
12:24 < MarcoFalke> sure
12:24 < MarcoFalke> but ceil at least needs a double for the time of calculation
12:24 < wumpus> so go with whatever results in the simplest code
12:25 < wumpus> you don't ever *need* doubles
12:25 < jtimon> I think avoiding the optional param as suggested by morcos certainly simplifies things
12:25 < morcos> MarcoFalke: Why do we NEED to change something?
12:25 < MarcoFalke> we need at least make getFee() monotonic
12:25 < morcos> ehh
12:26 < wumpus> morcos: yes, that's what first needs to be decided 
12:26 -!- mol11111 [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:26 < morcos> MarcoFalke: btw, i'm totally fine with just truncating all the time too, but you were against truncating to 0
12:26 < morcos> what i dont' want is more complexity
12:26 < wumpus> if we don't need to change something that'd be preferable, so we can catch up to document the current behavior
12:26 < jtimon> to be honest I'm still not sure what this is all about, even after reading the 2 PRs
12:27 < MarcoFalke> ok, I will submit a minimal code change patch this evening
12:27 < wumpus> if we could describe things in human understandable terms that'd help devs too
12:27 -!- mol11111 is now known as moli
12:27 < wumpus> as said, I've been maintaining this code for years and the fee code freaks me out
12:28 < jtimon> what about always truncating but instead of ever returning 0, just return 1 satoshi?
12:28 < wumpus> at least if there's a large change in behavior we should document it in the release notes next time :)
12:28 -!- molz [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
12:28 < MarcoFalke> jtimon, that's what I am going to do
12:28 < morcos> wumpus: i know you say you don't like doubles, but the mining code and the fee estimation code which are the things that use fee rates, both use them as doubles
12:28 < MarcoFalke> will result in least code and diff
12:28 < wumpus> morcos: that's awful
12:29 < jtimon> MarcoFalke: oh, nice, what's the problem with returning 0 in the first place anywa?
12:30 < MarcoFalke> we still use it in the wallet to "detect" what the user selected
12:30 < MarcoFalke> paytxfee or confirmtarget
12:30 < jtimon> and now the user can't select 0 fee?
12:30 < wumpus> doubles don't have exactly the same behavior on all platforms, which make it dangerous to use them for monetary values, we've had some strange reports of behavior while using doubles in the RPC layer
12:30 < morcos> wumpus: i mean i said that kind of for effect, its not really awful the way its used, and i'm fine keeping CFeeRate to not use doubles, but its worth keeping in mind that we're losing precision by converting it to some weird integer
12:30 < wumpus> now we've got rid of them there
12:31 < jtimon> just use int satoshis everywhere
12:31 < morcos> but its satoshis per size 
12:31 < wumpus> morcos: if you lose precision with integer arithmetic at least in a predictable, deterministic, platform independent way :)
12:32 < wumpus> but it should be possible not to lost precision, if you use the right amount of fixed point precision
12:32 < MarcoFalke> Using doubles for bitcoin should be fine right now, as a double can hold all possible values with exact precision IIRC.
12:32 < MarcoFalke> But we should avoid it for consistency
12:32 < morcos> wumpus: well for instance in the mining (actually mempool sorting) code its calculation using integers but they are converted to doubles to ignore overflow risk
12:32 < wumpus> 'should be fine' but please don't
12:33 < wumpus> they said the same about using doubles in RPC, and there's been some strange rounding errors
12:33 < MarcoFalke> Jup, people will look at the code and think this is best practise
12:33 < morcos> anywya, we're not talking about using doubles for an amount, i think everyone would 100% agree, that no bitcoin amount should ever be represented as a double  (bitcoins.satoshis)
12:33 < jtimon> I guess CFeeRate's ```/ 1000``` simplifies some parts of the code, but I still dislike the whole concept (and much more that this code is included in current libconsensus)
12:33 < sdaftuar> CFeeRate is in libconsensus?
12:34 < MarcoFalke> jtimon, you mean IsDust()?
12:34 < wumpus> I'd really prefer to stick to the point that doubles and floating point arithmetic dosn't belong in financial software
12:34 < jtimon> yes, from the beginning, I've been trying to move it out ever since without luck, but if someone else wants to rewrite any of my attempts I'm more than happy to review
12:36 < wumpus> I'm sure it is not used by any actual consensus code and could be moved out of libconsensus in due time
12:36 < jtimon> MarcoFalke: IsDust and dustThereshold too, that's the reason why it cannot simply be moved out (amount.h would remain without .cpp or all its code can be simply moved back to primitives/transaction.h but then policy/feerate.o needs to depend on the whole consensus/transaction.o instead of only amount.h)
12:37 < jtimon> wumpus: it can be moved out of consensus at any time
12:37 < wumpus> jtimon: right
12:38 < jtimon> for the first version that was small enough to just leave it for later, but we're leaving it for later ever since
12:38 < jtimon> s/we're/we've been
12:39 < wumpus> anyhow, re; fee, I think we should first have a plan what we really want, what is the current behavior, what is the intended behavior, before we just start changing code again and surpise users
12:40 < morcos> wumpus: to summarize what i think the CFeeRate current problem is , we definited it as satoshis/kB which doesn't have enough precision as an integer to not be a bit annoying (both close to 0 and too many ties in mempool sorting).  not super annoying, but it was a bit of a silly definition
12:41 < wumpus> morcos: yes I fully agree the current implementation of CFeeRate is somewhat silly
12:42 < jtimon> I guess the advantage of using KB instead of just bytes it's to contemplate fees below 1 satoshi per byte, which I have no idea if currently makes sense
12:42 < morcos> yes, jtimon from a human communication format satoshis/B makes more sense, but for precision, you really want satoshis/MB 
12:43 < jtimon> so any more generic replacement to contemplate lower fees would do it, I think
12:43 < wumpus> well the internal representation doesn't have to depend on human communication format at all
12:43 < wumpus> it cen be presented in whatever way makes sense to the user
12:43 < morcos> well CFeeRate is almost only for human communication format
12:43 < morcos> most things internally store fees and size separately
12:43 < morcos> and do the calculations as necessary
12:44 < jtimon> alright, so we need more precission and 1000 happens to be too small of a divider some times. what about an optional bytes param that defaults to 1000 ?
12:44 < wumpus> human communication depends on the formatting function only
12:44 < morcos> or like the estimation code use doubles b/c they're doing all kinds of crazy exponential decays and stuff
12:44 < wumpus> jtimon: you mean make it a rational?
12:45 < jtimon> I think that would open the door to some more simplifications for cases where you multiply by 1000 and divide by tx_size right after dividing by 1000 in the exnapsulated stuff
12:45 < wumpus> well it's better than a double :)
12:46 < jtimon> no, wait I've probably said something stupid, let me think more while looking at code
12:47 < morcos> well, its not causing me any issues right now, so i prefer no changes to anything that isn't an obvious improvement
12:47 < wumpus> morcos: absolutely
12:47 < wumpus> that's my whole point about the fee logic, really
12:49 < wumpus> first consider what is the current case, and what we want, so we can define what is an improvement
12:50 < morcos> the problem MarcoFalke is trying to solve (or at least part of it) isnt' a problem with CFeeRate, but with a shortcut in how we detect whether the user has selected to paytxfee
12:51 < morcos> it would make more sense to find out whether the paytxfee option has been set, and not whether it = 0 or rounds to 0 in terms of decidign whether to use dynamic fee estimation
12:51 < morcos> thats would be the ideal fix, but that would be a change of behavior potentially for users
12:51 < wumpus> I've been kind of caught by surprise by the fPayAtLeastCustomFee stuff, for example
12:52 < morcos> right now you can't select paytxfee=0  , that just seems silly, you should be able to set whatever fee you want, and if you select a fee, you don't use fee estimation, even if your fee rounds/truncates/ceilings/doubles/or trampolines to 0
12:53 < wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7633#issuecomment-195254622   I'd really like to avoid this another time
12:53 < wumpus> "how we detect whether the user has selected to paytxfee" let's just follow the straightforward route and add a boolean then
12:53 < wumpus> second guessing the user sucks
12:55 < wumpus> sure - we can change the API, it's not prohobitive to change the behavior at all, just be sure to mention it in the release notes :)
12:56 < MarcoFalke> I should have done the release notes as part of the pull probably. Still, no one yelled at me all the time before 0.12 was released. Even though my original pull was from September.
12:56 < wumpus> and we shoudl really write a document what the various fee options do, how they interact, what is the result in practice
12:56 < wumpus> it's soo flexible that no one understands really :)
12:57 < wumpus> I'm not blaming you at all MarcoFalke, it's a strange coincidence of circumstances
12:57 < MarcoFalke> you suggested to add a .md in /doc? I'd rather not do this taking considering that you need a pull every time someone wants to edit the file.
12:57 < wumpus> I don't care where
12:58 < MarcoFalke> bitcoin wiki it?
12:58 < MarcoFalke> or the website?
12:58 < MarcoFalke> Do we have infrastructure on the website for documentation yet?
12:58 < wumpus> fine with me, I usually put stuff in gists but that's hard to find I suppose
12:58 < wumpus> well on the website you need a pull for every change too
12:59 < MarcoFalke> but bitcoin/bitcoin commits are read by somewhat more people than the website commits
12:59 < wumpus> wikis have the problem that there's no change control at all
12:59 < wumpus> that's why we moved the BIPs to git
13:00 < wumpus> anyhow this isn't imporant, if you write it you get to decide where to put it
13:02 < wumpus> bitcoin.org has extensive infrastructure for documentation, don't think bitcoincore.org has
13:03 < morcos> what do you think about changing the names of those options.  i mean i know thats annoying.  but calling them paytxfeerate instead of paytxfee would make a whole lot more sense
13:04 < morcos> i don't know if its easy enough to do that in a compatible way, i guess we'd have to consolidate where the arguments are looked at
13:04 < wumpus> why not just document them better instead of change the name :)
13:05 < morcos> yeah i guess there are a ton of them
13:05 < wumpus> I mean for a clean slate, in retrospect, it would be awesome to name them differently, and as in any program there are plenty of awkwarly named options... but yes there's a strong backward compatibiltiy versus sensibility for new users compromise
13:06 < GitHub37> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #7660: [amount] Extend GetFee() by optional flag ceil (master...Mf1603-amountCeil) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7660
13:06 < GitHub110> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #7661:  [wallet] Round up to the next satoshi on odd fee rates  (master...Mf1603-walletCeil) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7661
13:07 < wumpus> and it's possible to argue that the name of the options themselves is just arbitrary, it's just a name, as long as it's not completely deceptive what matters is how they're documented
13:07 < MarcoFalke> Would be great to have different option names map to the same option to be used as synonyms... Which brings us back to the rewrite of the arg parser...
13:08 < wumpus> well we do have some options that just throw an error if you provide them, and mention that they're either removed or have a new name
13:08 < wumpus> but there's got to be a good motivation to do that, it shouldn't look like just sending the user on a wild goose chase :)
13:08 < MarcoFalke> paytxfee is still widely used. Would be nasty to require everyone change their conf
13:09 < morcos> wumpus: btw, i made your change to 7187, should i go ahead and squash all the commits, not sure if you thought review was done
13:09 < MarcoFalke> wumpus any update on "wumpus: Would it be possible for us to arrange open source licenses of the Jetbrains IDEs for C++ and Python? They offer free licenses to projects like this"
13:09 < wumpus> e.g. there's an issue to rename '-rescan' becuase many people use it out of confusion... well, yes, but you can't really keep the new name secret to clueless users :)
13:10 < wumpus> morcos: I think review was good for that, we should merge it
13:10 < wumpus> MarcoFalke: yea will do that, haven't got around to it
13:10 < wumpus> morcos: (and squash, yes)
13:13 < MarcoFalke> morcos (and others) Make sure to have the commit id somewhere in the GitHub discussion before you squash. Otherwise it's less transparent and harder to re-review if the reviewer hasn't pulled your repo yet.
13:13 < wumpus> morcos: I think changing the semantics in potentially dangerous way would be a good reason to rename them, and error when the old name is used
13:13 < morcos> wumpus: like maxsigcachesize  :)
13:16 < morcos> ok done
13:16 < wumpus> morcos: ehh that changed from entries to MiB didn't it
13:16 < wumpus> morcos: yes, luckily it's an option no one knows about :)
13:17 < morcos> yeah, i mean the damage is probably not that large, just an unlimited sigcache
13:17 < wumpus> but yes it'd have made sense to change the name
13:19 -!- MarcoFalke [8af6020a@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.10] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
13:20 < GitHub33> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/622fe6c32f41...14d6324a248d
13:20 < GitHub33> bitcoin/master 982670c Alex Morcos: Add LockPoints...
13:20 < GitHub33> bitcoin/master 14d6324 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7187: Keep reorgs fast for SequenceLocks checks...
13:20 < GitHub162> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7187: Keep reorgs fast for SequenceLocks checks (master...fastReorgBIP68) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7187
13:32 < btcdrak> The mempool behaviours for BIP68/112 have been backported by cherry-pick to 0.11 and 0.12 in PRs #7543, #7695 and #7693. Can I ask a few eyes you verify they are correct.
13:38 -!- achow101 [~achow101@pool-96-227-114-115.phlapa.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:44 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@128-79-141-196.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]
14:23 -!- Don_John [~Don@ip72-211-182-139.tc.ph.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:47 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)]
15:01 -!- randy-waterhouse [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/randy-waterhouse] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:30 -!- BashCo_ [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:33 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
15:43 -!- Thireus [~Thireus@vps-92.197.170.217.stwvps.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
15:43 -!- Thireus [~Thireus@vps-92.197.170.217.stwvps.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:58 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@c-68-34-102-231.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:00 -!- Thireus [~Thireus@vps-92.197.170.217.stwvps.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
16:01 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
16:11 -!- MarcoFalke [8af6020a@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.10] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:17 -!- wallet421 [~wallet42@172.58.104.227] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
16:34 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:46 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:47 -!- MarcoFalke [8af6020a@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.10] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
16:55 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@128-79-141-196.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:03 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@128-79-141-196.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]
17:06 -!- GreenIsMyPepper [~GreenIsMy@2605:6400:20:11aa:189e:28a5:52ed:8948] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
17:08 -!- GreenIsMyPepper [~GreenIsMy@2605:6400:20:11aa:189e:28a5:52ed:8948] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:20 -!- Cory [~C@unaffiliated/cory] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
17:21 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:22 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
17:23 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:24 -!- Cory [~C@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:29 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
17:35 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:55 -!- randy-waterhouse [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/randy-waterhouse] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
17:56 -!- jyap [~jyap@unaffiliated/jyap] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
17:56 -!- jyap [~jyap@server1.getjumbucks.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:56 -!- jyap [~jyap@server1.getjumbucks.com] has quit [Changing host]
17:56 -!- jyap [~jyap@unaffiliated/jyap] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:21 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-azboyycbtwyfpxwn] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
18:45 -!- droark [~droark@c-24-22-36-12.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Later.]
18:50 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:51 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:58 -!- jgarzik__ [~jgarzik@104-178-201-106.lightspeed.tukrga.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
19:10 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:15 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@173-31-39-168.client.mchsi.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:19 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: NicolasDorier, PaulCapestany, Arnavion, Chris_Stewart_5, jtimon, fredrin, jannes, slackircbridge, CodeShark, Guest27862,  (+2 more, use /NETSPLIT to show all of them)
19:25 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@173-31-39-168.client.mchsi.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- jtimon [~quassel@35.31.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- slackircbridge [~slackircb@45.55.41.36] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- fredrin [~fredrin@cm-84.215.171.162.getinternet.no] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- amiller [~socrates1@unaffiliated/socrates1024] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- jannes [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- Arnavion [arnavion@unaffiliated/arnavion] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- Guest27862 [~ChillazZ@194.97.152.20] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- CodeShark [sid126576@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mryabbrtgwhzoqmj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- NicolasDorier [sid129442@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-yshridwmazkddgda] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- anttea [~anttea@a88-112-146-73.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:25 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@173-31-39-168.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
19:25 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
19:26 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:41 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
19:51 -!- jl2012 [uid133844@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-chbkthvkuisyhwvm] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
20:00 -!- wumpus [~quassel@pdpc/supporter/professional/wumpus] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:02 -!- wumpus [~quassel@pdpc/supporter/professional/wumpus] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:06 -!- achow101 [~achow101@pool-96-227-114-115.phlapa.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:24 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
20:35 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:38 -!- BashCo_ [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:55 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit []
20:55 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:00 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
21:18 -!- mol11111 [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:19 -!- randy-waterhouse [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/randy-waterhouse] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:21 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
22:28 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:28 -!- zooko [~user@c-50-131-214-60.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:32 -!- evoskuil [~evoskuil@c-73-225-134-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:34 -!- evoskuil [~evoskuil@c-73-225-134-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:57 -!- gevs [~greg@unaffiliated/gevs] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
22:58 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
23:00 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
23:00 -!- dermoth [~thomas@175-79.162.dsl.aei.ca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
23:00 -!- dermoth [~thomas@175-79.162.dsl.aei.ca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:01 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:01 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:02 -!- Thireus [~Thireus@vps-92.197.170.217.stwvps.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:09 -!- gevs [~greg@unaffiliated/gevs] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:23 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
23:31 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:32 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-122-14-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
23:41 -!- jtimon [~quassel@35.31.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]