--- Day changed Mon Aug 07 2017
00:04 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c8b62c7de3d4...c1c671feb163
00:04 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master efac91e Matt Corallo: Always wait for threadGroup to exit in bitcoind shutdown...
00:04 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fce3f4f Matt Corallo: Fix resume-of-reindex-after-restart...
00:04 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 13ab353 Matt Corallo: Check for empty coinsview instead of just-reset coinsview in init...
00:05 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10919: Fix more init bugs. (master...2017-07-init-bugs) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10919
00:06 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c1c671feb163...fa646369489d
00:06 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 01699fb Matt Corallo: Fix resendwallettransactions assert failure if -walletbroadcast=0
00:06 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa64636 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10995: Fix resendwallettransactions assert failure if -walletbroadcast=0...
00:07 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10995: Fix resendwallettransactions assert failure if -walletbroadcast=0 (master...2018-08-walletbroadcast-assert) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10995
00:13 -!- J-wolf [~J-wolf@188.225.171.82] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:13 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:21 -!- J-wolf [~J-wolf@188.225.171.82] has quit [Quit: Leaving...]     
00:21 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mlwvtfxammivcbvx] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:31 -!- bryyan [~bryyan@74.215.210.39] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
00:31 -!- dobak [~dobak@c237-242.icpnet.pl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:05 -!- cdecker [~cdecker@mail.snyke.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
01:06 -!- cdecker [~cdecker@mail.snyke.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:08 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:20 -!- JackH [~laptop@host-80-43-141-200.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:29 -!- dobak [~dobak@c237-242.icpnet.pl] has quit []     
01:48 -!- JackH [~laptop@host-80-43-141-200.as13285.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
02:04 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
02:09 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:21 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:23 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@unaffiliated/alina-malina] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
02:24 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:26 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:26 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
02:36 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
02:38 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:38 < jonasschnelli> Anyone willing to review NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED BIP before opening a PR? https://github.com/jonasschnelli/bips/wiki/NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED-BIP-DRAFT
02:38 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: some of your comments about required block limits are now working into the BIP.
02:38 < jonasschnelli> I'm not sure about the undefined state of signalling both bits (the BIP states this mode as undefined but required to at least serve the last 90days/12'960)
02:38 < jonasschnelli> To leave enough room for future requirements
02:39 < sipa> jonasschnelli: thanks for working on this
02:40 < sipa> jonasschnelli: i'm not sure that both bits available should have a meaning at all
02:40 < sipa> as network nodes aggregate the bits they see by OR'ing them
02:41 < sipa> a node that at some point advertizes _LOW and later advertizes _HIGH, may result in nodes aggregating it to the combination of both
02:42 < sipa> so maybe LOW should mean "i can relay blocks and transactions at the tip, and also can be asked for blocks up to X deep", while HIGH only means "I can be asked for blocks between A and B deep"
02:42 < sipa> typically you'd set both
02:43 < sipa> or just LOW
02:46 < sipa> (just an idea, see what others think)
02:49 < gmaxwell> sipa: meh, I don't think the "I can do deep but not the tip" really makes sense, what you raise would be resolved by just defining each to be or newer and letting you combine them. 
02:52 < jonasschnelli> From a practical standpoint LOW is for the ones who prune to the minimum (current prune=550), HIGH probably for the ones who prune not to the minimum and/or use manual pruning. Also the depth value we set in HIGH will probably give those a guideline who not want to prune to the minimum
02:52 < jonasschnelli> I agree that setting both bits could remain completely undefined
02:53 < jonasschnelli> It just felt wasteful not to define the state when signalling both bits
02:54 < jonasschnelli> Maybe there are some peers who run manual pruning mode but haven't pruned so far and this state could be covered by both bits?
03:02 < sipa> gmaxwell: ?
03:09 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mlwvtfxammivcbvx] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
03:13 -!- Deacydal [~Deacyde@unaffiliated/deacyde] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:16 -!- Deacyded [~Deacyde@unaffiliated/deacyde] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
03:20 < wumpus> holy shit 2017-08-07 10:20:38 Error: Error loading wallet.dat: Wallet corrupted
03:21 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Changing host]     
03:21 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@unaffiliated/alina-malina] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:21 < jonasschnelli> wumpus: oh! Master?
03:22 < wumpus> apparently I still have #10952 merged
03:22 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10952 | [wallet] Remove vchDefaultKey and have better first run detection by achow101 · Pull Request #10952 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
03:22 < wumpus> let me try with master
03:22 < gmaxwell> wumpus: I was about to suggest 10952 to fix it.
03:22 < gmaxwell> (or usehd=0)
03:22 < jonasschnelli> The default key is sneaky!
03:23 < wumpus> master is ok
03:24 < wumpus> this is an old, pre-hd wallet that survived a long time - will try to figure out why #10952 rejects it later
03:24 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10952 | [wallet] Remove vchDefaultKey and have better first run detection by achow101 · Pull Request #10952 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
03:25 < jonasschnelli> What are the incentives / reasons why someone pruned to a larger target then the 550 minimum?
03:26 < jonasschnelli> (with the current p2p signaling)
03:26 < wumpus> the only reason I can think of is to support swapping wallets that can run a bit more out of sync
03:26 < jonasschnelli> Good point
03:26 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: having prune specified in megabytes is pretty daft.
03:26 < jonasschnelli> He     
03:26 < gmaxwell> I think in the future we'll have a small set of options.
03:26 < jonasschnelli> Yes     
03:27 < gmaxwell> and people will set larger ones to support the network more and due to rescans as mentioned.
03:28 < jonasschnelli> Yes. I think the thresholds we set in the BIP may have influence what options
03:28 < sipa> it helps to realize that effectively every reachable nodes that serves you blocks is altruistic
03:28 < jonasschnelli> We will have / users will choose
03:30 -!- Yogaqueef [~textual@dsl-hkibng42-5673c3-32.dhcp.inet.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:30 < gmaxwell> I think the advice in the BIP about connections is not really great advice. It's vague, and I think if followed it will cause a lot of pressure on pruned nodes (Esp because they will likely be much more rare among listening nodes for some time).  The network is self balancing.  If there is more demand on a node, it'll end up disconnecting some peers, and those peers will move elsewhere.
03:30 < gmaxwell> I think nodes should likely choose uniformly among all peers offering what they need. 
03:31 < jonasschnelli> I see this point. gmaxwell: would removing the connection part in the BIP makes sense?
03:31 < sipa> gmaxwell: i don't understand what you suggested earlier to deal with the OR'ing?
03:31 < jonasschnelli> (Leaving it up to the impl.)
03:31 < gmaxwell> if in the future pruned nodes become much more common as listening nodes than unpruned nodes, then it may make sense to try to avoid unpruned if you don't need them; but I don't expect that during the working life of this BIP (Basically by that point we'll have to have made other related service flag changes).
03:32 < gmaxwell> sipa: It is a set mean the same as the 1week option.
03:32 < gmaxwell> it's OR safe.
03:33 < sipa> parse error
03:33 < gmaxwell> @#$@# keyboard
03:33 < gmaxwell> (loses long strings of text)
03:33 < sipa> you need a new laptop
03:34 < gmaxwell> sipa: If both are set, it means the same as the 1week option.
03:34 < gmaxwell> Your suggestion allows a psycho signal "old but not new", which would just end up making that peer get ignored by peer selection (at best).
03:35 < sipa> that's an option too
03:35 < sipa> i'm just trying to not lose information by making the bits indicate orthogonal services
03:35 < gmaxwell> I don't think we should worry too much about using bits here. We will need a new addr message in the not so far future.
03:36 < gmaxwell> (because of HSNG and I2P)
03:37 < gmaxwell> and we avoid using them for other things.
03:37 < sipa> in that light, i wonder if we'll regret the choice of combining possibly 3 independent things into one bits (tx relay, block at tip relay, blocks up to a day old fetch)
03:38 < gmaxwell> I dunno, I think block at tip relay basically needs to impliy 288 in any case, you'll need it for reorg, and the peer will not find your block announcements useful if you can't help the peer reorg.
03:38 < gmaxwell> seems dangerous to me to introduce nodes in the topology that can't help you reorg.
03:39 < sipa> yes, i agree
03:39 < sipa> i'm just wondering whether maybe at some point we'll regret it due to evolutions we don't foresee now
03:39 < gmaxwell> for sure, but then we'll change it then.
03:40 < sipa> making the bits independent does not need to imply there is  recommendation or even permission to use them in odd ways "i relay blocks at the tip, and older than 3 months, except those between 1 and 2 years old!"
03:41 < gmaxwell> if you can signal it, everyone will need code to handle it.
03:42 < gmaxwell> which will me realizing that the sensless combination exists in the first place.
03:42 < sipa> which will me?
03:42 < gmaxwell> in general I prefer to avoid even being able to encode something that makes no more sense because it guarentees more corner cases you must handle.
03:43  * sipa zZzZ
04:03 -!- jannes [~jannes@095-097-246-234.static.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
04:35 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
04:39 -!- miknotauro [~miknotaur@node-1w7jr9qg7ouwcxbgz4j59xz53.ipv6.telus.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
04:43 -!- Deacyde [~Deacyde@unaffiliated/deacyde] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
04:43 -!- Deacydal [~Deacyde@unaffiliated/deacyde] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
04:45 -!- gaf_ [~fag@12.smos-linux.org] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
04:46 -!- gaf_ [~fag@12.smos-linux.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:06 < wumpus> seems I found the bug in #10952: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10952/files#r131637416
05:06 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10952 | [wallet] Remove vchDefaultKey and have better first run detection by achow101 · Pull Request #10952 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
05:10 < gmaxwell>       "value": 1.00,
05:11 < gmaxwell> ^ decoderawtransaction is not zero extending the value field. :-/
05:11 -!- JackH [~laptop@2a01:4c8:1038:6951:dd20:5c3f:b471:21a6] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:13 < wumpus> it's not using the correct formatting function
05:14 < wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/core_write.cpp#L187
05:15 < wumpus> uses FormatMoney directly instead of ValueFromAmount
05:16 < wumpus> I'll make a PR
05:34 < gmaxwell> argh!
05:39 -!- Matt- [~matt@195.162.102.18] has quit []     
05:47 < wumpus> sigh, I fixed it locally, now the tests are broken - lol
05:56 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #10999: Fix amounts formatting in `decoderawtransaction` (master...2017_08_decoderawtx_amount) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10999
05:59 < wumpus> gmaxwell: ^^
05:59 < gmaxwell> tests exist to make sure we don't fix bugs, apparently. :P
06:00 < wumpus> well in this case it's good that the test is so literal - we should catch misformats here - however it checks against the wrong answer :P
06:05 < gmaxwell> has this always been broken
06:05 < gmaxwell> ?     
06:16 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:30 -!- afk11 [~afk11@gateway/tor-sasl/afk11] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
06:35 -!- afk11 [~afk11@gateway/tor-sasl/afk11] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:44 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
06:52 < wumpus> at the least for very long (since the univalue switch?)
06:53 < wumpus> and at that time it's very possible that we weren't padding all amounts to 8 digits yet
06:54 < gmaxwell> I wonder if I managed to lose money due to this at some point. It's not entirely unlikely.
06:57 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:00 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:05 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:15 < wumpus> we started always returning 8 decimals in this commit in july 2015, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e061e2778d592826970483e0844308c4e9a12626
07:17 < wumpus> it was assumed that app RPC-facing stuff was using ValueFromAmount, but apparently TxToUniv in core_io didn't, probably because of some dependency tangle
07:18 < wumpus> I've checked the other remaining uses of FormatMoney afaik they're all in debug logging
07:36 < Lightsword> anything still needed for #10301?
07:36 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10301 | Check if sys/random.h is required for getentropy. by jameshilliard · Pull Request #10301 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
07:37 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]     
07:39 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:46 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]     
08:08 -!- JackH [~laptop@2a01:4c8:1038:6951:dd20:5c3f:b471:21a6] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
08:14 -!- Dizzle [~dizzle@108.171.182.16] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:15 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
08:15 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:15 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:19 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #11000: test: Add resendwallettransactions functional tests (master...201708-resendwallettransactions-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11000
08:20 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
08:23 -!- promag [~Adium@228.250.28.37.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:24 < promag> wumpus: ^^
08:25 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fa646369489d...318392ca7cda
08:25 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ee2d10a James Hilliard: Check if sys/random.h is required for getentropy on OSX.
08:25 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 318392c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10301: Check if sys/random.h is required for getentropy....
08:25 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10301: Check if sys/random.h is required for getentropy. (master...getentropy-rand) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10301
08:28 < wumpus> promag: congrats on #11000 I guess?
08:28 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11000 | test: Add resendwallettransactions functional tests by promag · Pull Request #11000 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
08:28 < wumpus> promag: I think you need to add it to the test lists
08:28 < promag> heh did nothing all week to catch it :P
08:28 < promag> right!
08:29 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:30 < promag> wumpus: extended script?
08:30 < promag> does it have to be run in travis?
08:35 < wumpus> if it takes up to a few seconds you should add it to the normal tests
08:36 < wumpus> extended tests is for tests that take significant time 
08:38 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
08:41 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #11001: [tests] Test disconnecting unsupported service bits logic. (master...unsupported_service_bits_test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11001
08:45 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:54 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
09:02 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:06 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:18 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
09:22 -!- promag [~Adium@228.250.28.37.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
09:30 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
09:31 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
09:43 -!- str4d [~str4d@host86-172-94-127.range86-172.btcentralplus.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:47 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/saleemrashid] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:47 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/saleemrashid] has left #bitcoin-core-dev ["WeeChat 1.9"]     
09:49 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:50 -!- str4d [~str4d@host86-172-94-127.range86-172.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
09:50 -!- jrayhawk_ is now known as jrayhawkj     
09:50 -!- jrayhawkj is now known as jrayhawk     
09:52 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:52 -!- str4d [~str4d@host86-172-94-20.range86-172.btcentralplus.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:58 -!- miknotauro [~miknotaur@node-1w7jr9qg7ouwbwikqsvlf1ikz.ipv6.telus.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:59 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]     
10:06 -!- promag [~Adium@228.250.28.37.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:09 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:21 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: re: https://github.com/jonasschnelli/bips/wiki/NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED-BIP-DRAFT#network-health-optional
10:21 < jonasschnelli> What if the BIP would recommend (optional) to connect - once in sync – to a lower percentage (10%) of the percentage of available NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED in addrman? Probably over-specifing?
10:21 < jonasschnelli> Nah.. nm. Let me remove that part... 
10:26 -!- d_t [~d_t@108-65-78-188.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:34 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@ip72-209-228-52.dc.dc.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:40 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: dislike that it still requires 90 days for both bits set. Would prefer if it didn't imply anything more than the 2 days
10:40 < jonasschnelli> Oh. Yes. Let me remove that part... 
10:42 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: its removed now
10:43 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: rather than forbid the bits when NODE_NETWORK is set, I suggest leaving them entirely undefined in that circumstance
10:44 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]     
10:44 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: I don't think one should signal LIMITED and NODE_NETWORK. It may confuse primitive implementations
10:45 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: forbidding such primitive implementations is why to undefine it now :p
10:45 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: please use BIP number 159
10:45 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
10:46 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:47 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Excess Flood]     
10:48 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:48 < sdaftuar> jonasschnelli: i think it's clearest if setting a bit has meaning independent from looking at other bits.
10:49 < sdaftuar> eg if you want to know if a node has all historical blocks, just check NODE_NETWORK
10:49 < sdaftuar> if you want to know if it serves recent blocks, just check NODE_LIMITED_*
10:49 < sdaftuar> and not owrry about setting both
10:49 < jonasschnelli> I see. Makes sense... I'll fix that
10:49 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
10:50 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
10:54 < jonasschnelli> Fixed
11:04 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:13 < xHire> jonasschnelli: please, what does committing a transaction in the context of fee bumping mean? (doing translation; `git blame qt/walletmodel.cpp` pointed to you :c))
11:14 -!- str4d [~str4d@host86-172-94-20.range86-172.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
11:14 < jonasschnelli> committing means probably add the wallet and broadcast? Need to check that source code comment later. Thx
11:15 < jonasschnelli> Add to the
11:15 -!- str4d [~str4d@host86-172-94-20.range86-172.btcentralplus.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:15 < xHire> right, that makes sense. thanks!
11:33 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:34 -!- Chris_St1 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:35 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit]     
11:35 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
11:37 -!- Chris_St1 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Client Quit]     
11:37 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:37 -!- dermoth [~dermoth@gateway/tor-sasl/dermoth] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
11:38 -!- dermoth [~dermoth@gateway/tor-sasl/dermoth] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:47 -!- Cheeseo [~Cheeseo@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/cheeseo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:51 < sdaftuar> gmaxwell: luke-jr: is it important that we cache the last call to CNB in getblocktemplate() and return it to callers who are calling getblocktemplate more frequently than every 5 seconds?
11:52 < sdaftuar> i've finally gotten around to revisiting #10200, and i think it would make sense to drop that cache, and make the proposed new CNB parameters for recent transaction inclusion arguments to getblocktemplate
11:52 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10200 | Mining: Skip recent transactions if fee difference is small by sdaftuar · Pull Request #10200 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
11:52 < sdaftuar> (rather than bitcoind arguments, which is where that PR started)
11:53 < luke-jr> sdaftuar: the cache is AFAIK mainly used for multiple clients calling GBT at almost the same time
11:54 < luke-jr> I'm not sure it makes sense to expose the parameters over RPC like that anyway.
11:54 < luke-jr> (why would a miner want to run with different configurations?)
11:54 < sdaftuar> the CNB parameters?  it seemd like it would be annoying to restart bitcoind if you wanted to change the parameter
11:54 < sdaftuar> eg in response to network conditions
11:55 < sdaftuar> i hadn't considered multiple rpc clients calling gbt on the same server...  i figured that for a single client, cnb should be fast enough that we could just invoke it each time
11:55 < sdaftuar> but no idea how much load it could take from multiple clients
11:58 < sdaftuar> eh, i will punt on it for now and just leave it as a bitcoind argument i guess
12:14 < luke-jr> sdaftuar: there are more than just mining parameters that are nice to adjust at runtime. Yet another use for a setconfig RPC..
12:15 -!- Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW     
12:15 < sdaftuar> sure, i agree with that in general
12:19 -!- promag [~Adium@228.250.28.37.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
12:27 -!- d_t [~d_t@108-65-78-188.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
12:31 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
12:38 < SopaXorzTaker> When will the alert key be published?
12:38 < SopaXorzTaker> (don't forget to withdraw the coins that are sitting there, devs!)
12:41 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:45 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
12:52 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:53 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #11002: [wallet] return correct error code from resendwallettransaction (master...resendwallettransaction_error_code) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11002
12:57 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:59 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-glpelueenmcvpbpx] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:01 -!- str4d [~str4d@host86-172-94-20.range86-172.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
13:13 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
13:13 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:21 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
13:22 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:24 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
13:29 < jnewbery> jonasschnelli: I agree with sdaftuar and sipa that bits should be considered independently.
13:30 < jnewbery> it makes logic straightforward: if (NODE_NETWORK) {can serve me all blocks} else if (NODE_LIMITED_HIGH) {can serve me blocks up to 8 days} else if (NODE_LIMITED_LOW) {can serve be blocks up to 2 days} else {can't serve me blocks}
13:31 < jnewbery> I'd remove the line "The required behaviour when signaling both bits (NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED_LOW & NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED_HIGH) is currently undefined."
13:32 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
13:33 < jnewbery> I also think we should consider sipa's point about orthogonal services having their own bits (tx relay, block relay, addr relay, blocks up to 8 days). It's not like we're short of bits. And the edge-handling code isn't that difficult. For now, just reject if one but not all of them are set.
13:37 -!- Dizzle [~dizzle@108.171.182.16] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
13:37 < gmaxwell> if we reject, then we can't use them seperately in the future because older peers will ignore us.
13:39 < sipa> jnewbery: i changed the links on the wiki to be section references rather than URLs, and added more
13:48 < eck> i want to extend the backupwallet command so that there's a new optional argument, the file mode of the backup file. For a change like this, is it better to ask for interest on the mailing list? or should I just write the code and send a PR?
13:50 < eck> arguably this would be better done by allowing there to be different rpcusers with different sets of permissions, but that change seems too expansive
14:02 < jnewbery> sipa: looks good. I think everything in #9889 is now covered
14:02 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9889 | TODO for release notes 0.15.0 · Issue #9889 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
14:03 < luke-jr> jnewbery: that wastes bits
14:05 < jnewbery> gmaxwell you're right. Reject is incorrect. Should have said 'ignore bits if one but not all of them are set'
14:05 < luke-jr> unless perhaps it's if (NODE_NETWORK) else if (NODE_LIMITED_LOW) else if (NODE_LIMITED_HIGH) …
14:06 < luke-jr> then the LIMITED bits are properly ignored if NETWORK is set, and if both LIMITED are set, behaviour is only guaranteed as LIMITED_LOW (ie, what the BIP currently says)
14:07 < luke-jr> (leaving the LIMITED_LOW | LIMITED_HIGH combination for a LOW + deterministic assortment of history)
14:08 -!- jamesob [~james@tempo-automation.static.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:08 -!- promag [~Adium@137.22.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:12 < sdaftuar> i think we should interpret bits as only being affirmative for a given property, and not denying other services.  imo that is the clearest way to describe your state, even if not information maximizing.
14:15 < jnewbery> I agree. I don't think the meaning of a single bit should be dependent on other bits
14:16 < sipa> agree
14:16 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]     
14:17 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:19 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:22 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
14:23 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:27 < promag> jnewbery: updated #11000, ty
14:27 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11000 | test: Add resendwallettransactions functional tests by promag · Pull Request #11000 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
14:28 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] eklitzke opened pull request #11003: Docs: Capitalize bullet points in CONTRIBUTING guide (master...contributing_grammar) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11003
14:28 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:29 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
14:32 < jnewbery> thanks promag
14:34 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]     
14:37 -!- unholymachine [~quassel@c-69-248-123-139.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
14:40 -!- unholymachine [~quassel@2601:8c:c003:9f16:90ec:37a4:992b:83d4] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:41 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:42 < luke-jr> jnewbery: so we just burn 1 bit for every resolution of chain archival? :/
14:43 < jnewbery> if there are only two resolutions, that's not a problem
14:43 < luke-jr> there aren't.
14:43 < luke-jr> even with just this BIP, there are three. and no reason to expect it to end with that.
14:43 < jnewbery> by the time we run out of bits, we'll already have the new addr message
14:43 < luke-jr> why do we want a new addr message?
14:44 < jnewbery> 06:35 < gmaxwell> I don't think we should worry too much about using bits here. We will need a new addr message in the not so far future.
14:44 < jnewbery> 06:36 < gmaxwell> (because of HSNG and I2P)
14:46 < luke-jr> making the IP size longer isn't really a reason to use service bits unwisely
15:02 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/318392ca7cda...fa8a0639f7b0
15:02 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5e35cd9 John Newbery: [tests] Test disconnecting unsupported service bits logic....
15:02 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa8a063 MarcoFalke: Merge #11001: [tests] Test disconnecting unsupported service bits logic....
15:03 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #11001: [tests] Test disconnecting unsupported service bits logic. (master...unsupported_service_bits_test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11001
15:05 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
15:06 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:08 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:20 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:24 -!- Hello [d49f471e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.159.71.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:25 -!- d_t [~d_t@108-65-78-188.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:25 < Hello> everyone, Can somebody inform me on how to check if the coin chain has split ? is there a RPC command ?
15:26 < sipa> getchaintips
15:27 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
15:28 -!- sam_c [~sam_c@gateway/tor-sasl/stanley] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:30 < Hello> hey sipa thank you for the tip but it says method not found
15:31 < LordCow> bitcoin-cli getchaintips
15:31 < Hello> I forgot to mention I want to check this on a alt coin wallet
15:34 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
15:39 < Hello> Client version is 1.0.0.0-g9ccfb23-beta
15:40 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]     
15:43 < gmaxwell> oh jesus I broke the release notes wiki, pieter is fixing it. 
15:44 < gmaxwell> Pro tip: if you hit edit, then change the title for a page on the wiki, it nukes the history.
15:45 < gmaxwell> (people are circulating links to the release notes wiki as if it were the 0.15 release notes, so I tried to change the title to say it's a draft)
15:47 -!- promag [~Adium@137.22.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
15:48 < sipa> Hello: then go yell at its developers
15:48 < sipa> gmaxwell: fixed
15:50 < Hello> Sipa: I can't yell at myself lmao
15:52 < sipa> Hello: in any case, off topic here
15:52 < Hello> sipa: thanks for replying have a nice day
15:53 -!- promag [~Adium@137.22.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:57 -!- Hello [d49f471e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.159.71.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
16:01 -!- miknotauro [~miknotaur@node-1w7jr9qg7ouwbwikqsvlf1ikz.ipv6.telus.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
16:01 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
16:02 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
16:02 -!- Giszmo [~leo@ppp-88-217-101-204.dynamic.mnet-online.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
16:09 -!- elkalamar [~elkalamar@84.126.69.179.dyn.user.ono.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
16:22 -!- Soligor [~Soligor@unaffiliated/soligor] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
16:33 -!- Soligor [~Soligor@unaffiliated/soligor] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
16:38 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-glpelueenmcvpbpx] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
16:53 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: you should move the block of new questions at the top of https://luke.dashjr.org/programs/kycpoll/answers.php to the bottom, now it just looks stupid with one response.
16:58 -!- promag [~Adium@137.22.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
17:00 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
17:01 -!- promag [~Adium@137.22.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:12 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:22 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:27 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
17:30 -!- jimpo [~jimpo@ec2-54-175-255-176.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:32 < jimpo> What is HSNG? (mentioned in discussion of new addr message)
17:33 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]     
17:35 < gmaxwell> Hidden services NG. Tor HS addresses will be becoming 256 bits long.
17:35 < gmaxwell> NG = next gen, I assume
17:36 < jimpo> interesting. thx
17:38 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
17:39 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
17:43 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:45 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:49 -!- Cheeseo [~Cheeseo@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/cheeseo] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
17:52 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:00 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
18:05 -!- jimpo [~jimpo@ec2-54-175-255-176.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
18:13 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:18 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
18:29 -!- shaolinfry [uid168121@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-kfijercizribzlxw] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
18:29 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
18:31 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:33 -!- jimpo [~jimpo@ec2-54-175-255-176.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:34 < jimpo> is there anyone working/focussing on extracting libbitcoinconsensus?
18:36 < Chris_Stewart_5> jimpo: Last I knew jtimon was, not sure if he is still working on it though
18:39 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] eklitzke opened pull request #11005: Tests: Add a lint check for trailing whitespace (master...whitespace) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11005
19:04 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@unaffiliated/alina-malina] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
19:07 -!- jimpo [~jimpo@ec2-54-175-255-176.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
19:08 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:17 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]     
19:17 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
19:18 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:29 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:31 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Snoozing.]     
19:34 -!- jamesob [~james@tempo-automation.static.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
19:35 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
19:37 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
19:38 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:42 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:44 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
19:47 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:53 -!- jouke [~worst@unaffiliated/komkommer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
19:55 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
19:55 -!- jouke [~worst@unaffiliated/komkommer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:59 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:02 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #11006: WIP: Improve shutdown process (master...201708-fast-shutdown) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11006
20:05 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
20:06 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:12 -!- veleiro1 [~sleeper@184-15-124-143.dr02.chtn.wv.frontiernet.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:12 -!- veleiro [~sleeper@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
20:14 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
20:26 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:29 -!- ula [~kvirc@b2b-78-94-11-194.unitymedia.biz] has quit [Quit: KVIrc 4.2.0 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/]     
20:40 -!- promag [~Adium@137.22.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
20:42 -!- veleiro1 [~sleeper@184-15-124-143.dr02.chtn.wv.frontiernet.net] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []     
20:54 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
21:14 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
21:22 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: hmm, but it makes sense to show them up top in the question page :/
21:27 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: so make the order different for each, questions by least answers answers by most
21:35 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Changing host]     
21:35 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@unaffiliated/alina-malina] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
21:52 -!- d_t [~d_t@108-65-78-188.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
22:20 -!- dcousens [~anon@c110-22-219-15.sunsh4.vic.optusnet.com.au] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
22:20 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: done
22:29 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
22:37 -!- corinrose_ [uid137375@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wiaihxrqbquofxiv] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:12 -!- miknotauro [~miknotaur@node-1w7jr9qg7ouwbwikqsvlf1ikz.ipv6.telus.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:12 -!- Austindoggie [~austindog@2600:380:c06d:315e:58c1:a2c4:aada:fbe9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:17 -!- Austindoggie [~austindog@2600:380:c06d:315e:58c1:a2c4:aada:fbe9] has left #bitcoin-core-dev ["AndroIRC"]     
23:25 -!- dermoth [~dermoth@gateway/tor-sasl/dermoth] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
23:25 -!- dermoth [~dermoth@gateway/tor-sasl/dermoth] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:48 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
23:49 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:53 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]