--- Day changed Thu May 05 2016
00:13 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
00:15 < cjcj> What is the git process for including a specific PR (#6853) into the v0.11.2 branch?
00:16 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-upobqorwblvlurox] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:18 < Guest7895> cjcj: it gets backporter if it's considered critical
00:19 < Guest7895> v0.11.2 is a release, not a branch, by the way
00:20 < Guest7895> 6853 is not a bugfix, and certainly not a critical one
00:22 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:24 -!- gill3s [~textual@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:25 < btcdrak> cjcj: all changes should be made to master, and then they can be backported as required. You backport to the specific branch 0.12, and 0.11
00:26 < btcdrak> cjcj: normally you just mark it as "requires backport", and the maintainers will cherry-pick backport it after merge, but if it has lots of merge conflicts with the backport branch then you may need to open a PR for it (but wait until master merge first).
00:29 -!- LeMiner [LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:30 < cjcj> btcdrak: I never intended to PR this. It would be for my own use only. The 0.12 branch doesn't work for some reason for my case, and #6853 is the only PR from 0.12 I really need. Was just wondering of a painless way to include it, but I think I will just build from CodeSharks fNoRetarget branch.
00:31 < Guest7895> cjcj: well you can git cherry-pick
00:32 < Guest7895> though i'm interested why 0.12 does not work for you... perhaps that's an indication of a bigger problem
00:34 < btcdrak> what does "does not work for me" mean specifically?
00:34 -!- Guest7895 [~pw@2a02:348:86:3011::1] has quit [Changing host]
00:34 -!- Guest7895 [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:34 -!- Guest7895 is now known as sipa
00:35 < cjcj> Guest7895: Will check out that command. Am not very familiar with git yet. I don't know yet why 0.12, but I bet the problem is on my end. For now 0.11.2 just works so I will continue from there for now.
00:39 < cjcj> btcdrak: The program crashes when I make an RPC request in 0.12 after running for a while, but it works fine in 0.11.
00:41 < sipa> perhaps you should open an issue for that?
00:41 < sipa> or is this with heavy local modifications?
00:43 < cjcj> sipa: I think the problem is on my end, but I will debug the issue further when I got time and open an issue if it doesn't resolve.
00:43 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:43 < cjcj> I'm using python-bitcoinlib as well, so maybe the issue could lie there.
00:44 < cjcj> Are there heavy differences in the RPC code between 0.11 and 0.12?
00:44 < sipa> you'll need to give a bit more information about what you're doing
00:44 < sipa> some things changed a lot, others not at all
00:45 < wumpus> yes, you need to be more specific about what is not working, 'it doesn't work' is  not a good bug report
00:46 < wumpus> what are you doing, what error do you get back
00:46 < wumpus> does bitcoind crash ,if so can you provide a traceback
00:46 < wumpus> etc
00:47 < wumpus> if you just want to cherry-pick one commit, use the git cherry-pick command, it may be easy, it may also be very hard if the surrounding code changed a lot between 0.11 and 0.12 (large chance)
00:49 < cjcj> bitcoind doesn't crash, only the python script I'm running. Will provide a traceback once I have removed some personal info from it.
00:50 < sipa> ah, ok :)
01:24 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
01:25 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:29 -!- gill3s [~textual@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
01:29 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
01:49 -!- Justinus [~Justinus@192.122.131.41] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:52 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@c-68-55-113-152.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:52 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has quit [Quit: bye]
01:53 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:54 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:59 < GitHub26> [bitcoin] avar closed pull request #8003: Get rid of a compiler warning due to #if 0'd test (master...fix-unused-function-compiler-warning) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8003
02:00 < GitHub154> [bitcoin] avar opened pull request #8005: Add a comment indicating that the btc devs don't want a warning fixed (master...note-that-unused-function-compiler-warning-should-not-be-fixed) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8005
02:04 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@79.242.108.93.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:14 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:20 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)]
02:26 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:27 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/spudowiar] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:59 -!- jtimon [~quassel@65.28.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:59 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:38 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:44 < GitHub73> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/42a67533828f...f9b4582292e8
03:44 < GitHub73> bitcoin/master 47eda2d fanquake: [depends] Add -stdlib=libc++ to darwin CXX flags
03:44 < GitHub73> bitcoin/master f9b4582 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8002: [depends] Add -stdlib=libc++ to darwin CXX flags...
03:44 < GitHub176> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8002: [depends] Add -stdlib=libc++ to darwin CXX flags (master...depends-darwin-stdlib) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8002
03:48 -!- jannes [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:52 < GitHub88> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f9b4582292e8...ff69aafe52f9
03:52 < GitHub88> bitcoin/master 0281678 Warren Togami: doc: Fedora build requirements
03:52 < GitHub88> bitcoin/master ff69aaf Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7968: doc: Fedora build requirements...
03:52 < GitHub75> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7968: doc: Fedora build requirements (master...fedora_build_readme) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7968
03:53 < GitHub74> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ff69aafe52f9...e8d917591f28
03:53 < GitHub74> bitcoin/master f7c4f79 Daniel Kraft: [trivial] Add missing const qualifiers....
03:53 < GitHub74> bitcoin/master e8d9175 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7977: [trivial] Add missing const qualifiers....
03:53 < GitHub193> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7977: [trivial] Add missing const qualifiers. (master...consts) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7977
03:54 < GitHub20> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e8d917591f28...06303533230f
03:54 < GitHub20> bitcoin/master f90efbf Andrew: Create signmessagewithprivkey rpc...
03:54 < GitHub20> bitcoin/master 7db0ecb Andrew Chow: Test for signing messages...
03:54 < GitHub20> bitcoin/master 0630353 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7953: Create signmessagewithprivkey rpc...
03:55 < GitHub14> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7953: Create signmessagewithprivkey rpc (master...signmessagewithprivkey) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7953
03:58 < GitHub54> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/06303533230f...d51618e481ab
03:58 < GitHub54> bitcoin/master 091d6e0 Wladimir J. van der Laan: http: Do a pending c++11 simplification...
03:58 < GitHub54> bitcoin/master f97b410 Wladimir J. van der Laan: http: Add log message when work queue is full...
03:58 < GitHub54> bitcoin/master 37b2137 Wladimir J. van der Laan: http: Change boost::scoped_ptr to std::unique_ptr in HTTPRequest...
03:58 < GitHub179> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7966: http: Do a pending c++11 simplification handling work items (master...2016_04_httpserver_c++11) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7966
03:58 -!- anchow101 [~achow101@pool-96-227-114-115.phlapa.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:01 < wumpus> anything else that is ready for merge?
04:02 -!- achow101 [~achow101@pool-96-227-114-115.phlapa.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
04:02 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:03 < gmaxwell> I wish I knew where #7840 was. 
04:09 < wumpus> well seems to have plenty of tested as well as untested acks
04:09 < wumpus> there are some nits by sdaftuar: do they need to be handled in that pull?
04:10 < gmaxwell> sipa wanted to stop making refactors further, otherwise it would never go in, so I dont ~think~ so.
04:10 < gmaxwell> I have further changes on top of that that I'm siting on waiting for that to go in.
04:10 < wumpus> if there is nothing *critical* and it's only about refactors, I'd suggest the same
04:13 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@87.254.202.246] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:13 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@87.254.202.246] has quit [Changing host]
04:13 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@unaffiliated/cryptapus] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:14 < wumpus> so that means #7840 is ready...
04:15 < GitHub130> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 6 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d51618e481ab...3b9a0bf41f23
04:15 < GitHub130> bitcoin/master f2d3ba7 Gregory Maxwell: Eliminate TX trickle bypass, sort TX invs for privacy and priority....
04:15 < GitHub130> bitcoin/master dc13dcd Pieter Wuille: Split up and optimize transaction and block inv queues
04:15 < GitHub130> bitcoin/master ed70683 Pieter Wuille: Handle mempool requests in send loop, subject to trickle...
04:15 < GitHub56> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7840: Several performance and privacy improvements to inv/mempool handling (master...splitinvtxblock) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7840
04:15 < wumpus> anything else?
04:16 -!- fanquake [~Adium@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:16 < wumpus> doing final testing on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7814 at the moment
04:17 < gmaxwell> wumpus: whats the goal in the rounds of merging right now? just cleaning out backlog?
04:17 < wumpus> just moving forward
04:17 < gmaxwell> Good.
04:18 < gmaxwell> #7934 seems good to me I've had it running since my utACK without issue.
04:23 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
04:25 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:25 < fanquake> wumpus issues that could be reviewed/closed by inactivity 6835 6355 
04:26 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit]
04:28 < wumpus> yes #6835 won't be merged anyway - it at least used to be kept up to date by people that cared about it, but it can just as well be a separate branch on someone's repository without being a pull request
04:29 < fanquake> Also #7149
04:30 < wumpus> not sure about #6355, seems it just received very little review and testing
04:31 < wumpus> generally I don't close pulls for inactivty, only issues, if the OP doesn't respond to requests for more data. In this case the author can't help that his PR received so little attention
04:33 < wumpus> bah #7149 has a lot of changes for a 'bugfix'
04:47 < fanquake> Seems that #7814 fails on osx when you run the extended test suite
04:52 -!- MarcoFalk_ [8af60208@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:52 < MarcoFalk_> fanquake, which test / exception?
04:55 -!- murch [~murch@p4FE3A502.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:55 < fanquake> MarcoFalk_ will post to GH
04:57 < fanquake> Looks like you've just missed signmessages.py
04:59 < MarcoFalk_> When was this merged?
04:59 < MarcoFalk_> Is probably a merge conflict
05:00 < MarcoFalk_> You are running merge(master, pull) ?
05:00 < fanquake> When did I merge it? 10 minutes ago
05:00 < fanquake> Looking at the PR, you haven't touched signmessages.py at all
05:03 < MarcoFalk_> Oh, actually you need to compile if you also want to run the signmessage.py test
05:03 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
05:03 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:10 < GitHub118> [bitcoin] Tyler-Hardin opened pull request #8006: Qt: Add option to disable the system tray icon (master...disable-tray) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8006
05:15 < jonasschnelli> Whoha! PR/Issue# >8000!
05:16 < wumpus> it will take some getting used to 5-digit PRs/issues
05:17 < jonasschnelli> hah.. yes. Soon.
05:18 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:23 -!- fanquake [~Adium@unaffiliated/fanquake] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
05:30 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
05:49 -!- MarcoFalk_ [8af60208@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.138.246.2.8] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
05:56 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:00 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
06:15 -!- blur3d [~blur3d@d114-78-38-124.rdl805.qld.optusnet.com.au] has quit [Quit: blur3d]
06:20 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@unaffiliated/cryptapus] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
06:32 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@unaffiliated/cryptapus] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:33 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@unaffiliated/cryptapus] has quit [Client Quit]
06:41 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@87.254.202.246] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:41 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@87.254.202.246] has quit [Changing host]
06:41 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@unaffiliated/cryptapus] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:50 -!- TomMc [~tom@unaffiliated/tommc] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:51 -!- jtimon [~quassel@65.28.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:07 -!- muuqwaul [~denetrabu@96.93.57.150] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
07:16 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/spudowiar] has quit [Quit: biab]
07:21 -!- MrHodl [~fuc@5.175.208.109] has quit []
07:26 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:27 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:30 -!- gill3s [~textual@37.162.10.50] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:31 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-122-14-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:31 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:35 -!- BonyM [~BonyM-I@ua-83-227-211-4.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:36 -!- gill3s [~textual@37.162.10.50] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
07:38 -!- BonyM [~BonyM-I@ua-83-227-211-4.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:39 -!- BonyM [~BonyM-I@ua-83-227-211-4.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:40 -!- gill3s [~textual@37.162.10.50] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:45 -!- Arnavion [arnavion@unaffiliated/arnavion] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:45 -!- Arnavion [arnavion@unaffiliated/arnavion] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:49 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:53 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
07:55 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:59 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:59 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/spudowiar] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:03 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
08:05 < GitHub126> [bitcoin] kazcw opened pull request #8007: Minor locking improvements (master...locknits) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8007
08:20 -!- gill3s [~textual@37.162.10.50] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
08:21 -!- [\\\] [~triplesla@unaffiliated/imsaguy] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:22 -!- tripleslash [~triplesla@unaffiliated/imsaguy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:28 -!- ebfull [~sean@73.34.119.0] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
08:42 -!- muuqwaul [~denetrabu@96.93.57.150] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:02 -!- tylerhardin [~tyler@50.111.90.101] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:03 -!- tylerhardin [~tyler@50.111.90.101] has quit [Client Quit]
09:07 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/spudowiar] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:08 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/spudowiar] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:10 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/spudowiar] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:11 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/spudowiar] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:27 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:29 -!- dirtynewshoes [~dirtynews@sydnns0115w-047054250089.dhcp-dynamic.FibreOP.ns.bellaliant.net] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.8]
09:31 -!- dirtynewshoes [~dirtynews@sydnns0115w-047054250089.dhcp-dynamic.FibreOP.ns.bellaliant.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:43 -!- Don_John [~Don@250-223-114-134.nat.resnet.nau.edu] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:45 -!- Don_John [~Don@250-223-114-134.nat.resnet.nau.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:56 -!- jannes [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
10:00 -!- muuqwaul [~denetrabu@96.93.57.150] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
10:02 < GitHub84> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3b9a0bf41f23...006cdf64dc93
10:02 < GitHub84> bitcoin/master ec9ad5f Patrick Strateman: Replace memcmp with std::equal in CScript::FindAndDelete...
10:02 < GitHub84> bitcoin/master c0f660c Patrick Strateman: Replace c-style cast with c++ style static_cast.
10:02 < GitHub84> bitcoin/master e2a30bc Gavin Andresen: Unit test for CScript::FindAndDelete
10:02 < GitHub194> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7907:  Optimize and Cleanup CScript::FindAndDelete (master...2016-04-17-findanddelete) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7907
10:02 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:05 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:05 < GitHub197> [bitcoin] JeremyRand opened pull request #8009: Docs: Fixed invalid example paths in gitian-building.md (master...doc-gitian-building-offline-paths-fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8009
10:06 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
10:12 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:25 -!- fedruantine [fedruantin@2600:3c03::f03c:91ff:fe55:c675] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:27 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
10:28 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:31 -!- jtimon [~quassel@65.28.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
10:46 -!- TomMc [~tom@unaffiliated/tommc] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
11:23 -!- ebfull [~sean@73.34.119.0] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:24 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@79.242.108.93.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:26 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@79.242.108.93.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:30 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@79.242.108.93.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
11:56 -!- To7 [~theo@cpe-158-222-222-232.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:57 -!- muuqwaul [~denetrabu@96.93.57.150] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:00 < wumpus> meeting time?
12:00 < anchow101> yes?
12:01 < btcdrak> yes
12:01 < jonasschnelli> yes
12:01 < gmaxwell> I guess so.
12:01 < wumpus> #startmeeting
12:01 < lightningbot> Meeting started Thu May  5 19:01:24 2016 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
12:01 < lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
12:02 < BlueMatt> hi all
12:02 < btcdrak> topics?
12:02 < wumpus> last week's action items were
12:02 < wumpus> ACTION: (sipa) list a few areas where i think mildly tricky things are done that warrant review (wumpus, 19:08:50)
12:02 -!- TomMc [~tom@unaffiliated/tommc] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:02 < sipa> in a plane, i can only stay online for 15 minutes
12:02 < wumpus> ACTION: bip 144 needs to include the service bit stuff 
12:02 < sipa> oops, forgot about that; will do
12:03 < sipa> that's done
12:03 < instagibbs> wumpus, merged
12:03 < gmaxwell> petertodd: morcos: sdaftuar: phantomcircuit: MarcoFalk_: jonasschnelli: luke-jr: jtimon: instagibbs: 
12:03 < wumpus> ACTION: (gmaxwell) try to extract some feedback e.g. from roasbeef to reimplemented, who might be aware of other limitations in the spec
12:03 < phantomcircuit> im here
12:03 < sdaftuar> hi
12:03 < cfields> here
12:03 < gmaxwell> wumpus: I've failed to do that so far, sorry.
12:04 < wumpus> no rush I suppose
12:04 < wumpus> any other topics?
12:04 < anchow101> segwit versionbit
12:04 < nickler> I've had a look at the btcd segwit PR, it includes around 5 tests
12:04 < wumpus> #topic segwit versionbit
12:05 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:05 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:05 < anchow101> The bip still says tbd for bit and date. 
12:05  * sipa randomly proposes bit (1 << 4)
12:05  * instagibbs tries rng, gets 4
12:05 < wumpus> if there's no special reason to pick a specific bit I'd suggest previous_bit+1
12:05 < btcdrak> 8 is lucky in China 
12:06 < sdaftuar> previous_bit + 1 makes sense to me...
12:06 < btcdrak> wumpus: ack
12:06 < sipa> so (1 << 1), also fine
12:06 < anchow101> +1
12:06 < BlueMatt> I'm with btcdrak 
12:06 < wumpus> otherwise it leaves holes, not a big deal, but dealing out consecutively may reduce the chance of accidentally duplicate assignments
12:06 < btcdrak> are we ready to think about dates? even for testnet?
12:07 < jl2012> i think we should set the testnet date now?
12:07 < gmaxwell> sipa: whatever number you're proposing please post it to the mailing list.
12:07 < jl2012> start 1 Apr 2016, end 1 Jan 2018?
12:07 < wumpus> probably we should have some living document that keeps track of current bit assignments, outside the bips
12:07 < NicolasDorier> for testnet do we need a date ? we did not for csv
12:08 < anchow101> NicolasDorier, the dat for csv on testnet was March 1st
12:08 < anchow101> *date
12:08 < NicolasDorier> ok my bad
12:09 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
12:10 < btcdrak> wumpus: maybe we can add a file bip-0009/assignments.md in the bips repository
12:10 < anchow101> If the release can be out before June, what about June 1st for a mainnet start date? And May 1st for testnet?
12:10 -!- cloudnthings [7deca655@gateway/web/freenode/ip.125.236.166.85] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:10 < gmaxwell> Dates should not be set until the software is known ready for release, and we are not currently there.
12:10 < gmaxwell> There is no need to be over-eager.
12:10 < sipa> i think we need to have a deployment active on testnet before even beginning to consider a start time on mainnet
12:11 < wumpus> btcdrak: sounds good to me
12:11 < gmaxwell> I think june first would be fine, but it could be set the day before, for all the system cares.
12:11 < wumpus> #action add a file bip-0009/assignments.md in the bips repository to keep track of an overview of current bit assignments separate from their bips
12:11 < btcdrak> jl2012: no need to have such a long expiry date for testnet.
12:13 < wumpus> okay
12:14 < wumpus> so do people agree on june 1?
12:14 < morcos> for testnet?
12:14 < sipa> for testnet?
12:14 < morcos> i don't see why not make it earlier
12:14 < wumpus> that's what the discussion is about right?
12:14 < morcos> it kind of doesn't matter, just make it may 1st and it happens when it happens
12:14 < sipa> indeed
12:14 < wumpus> for mainnet it'd be kind of crazy to decide on an activation date now IMO
12:14 < btcdrak> morcos: ack
12:15 < sipa> we're not testing the deployment logic and teansitions
12:15 < gmaxwell> morcos +1 for testnet.
12:15 < sipa> may 1st for testnet sounds finr
12:15 < wumpus> may 1st? more time travel? I've seen enough deloreans this week
12:15 < jonasschnelli> hah
12:15 < morcos> i might be obnoxious and start now...  :)
12:15 < instagibbs> morcos, hostile softforks incoming
12:15  * sipa is going to disappear
12:15 < gmaxwell> This date is not something that needs to be set _in advance_, and it also shouldn't be set without coordiating with other implementers (at least in principle)
12:15 < morcos> wumpus: its what we did with csv, it just means you can starg signaling immediately
12:16 < wumpus> okay, no decision on a date then
12:16 < wumpus> #action discuss testnet activation date on bitcoin-dev mailing list
12:16 < morcos> gmaxwell: i kind of disagree, i think that the code is mature enough that we should activate on testnet now
12:16 < gmaxwell> morcos: I'm not talking about testnet.
12:16 < morcos> gmaxwell: teh rest of us are  :)
12:16 < wumpus> we AREE talking about testnet
12:16 < gmaxwell> Testnet is fine. do whatever with testnet. If it causes turbulance there, oh well.
12:16 < wumpus> please don't confuse things
12:17 < gmaxwell> wumpus: _YOU_ are talking about testnet jl2012 and anchow101 were not.
12:17 < gmaxwell> I already +1 morcos for testnet.
12:17 < wumpus> huh *confused*
12:17 < jl2012> no, I'm talking about testnet
12:17 < phantomcircuit> haha
12:17 < morcos> ok so to summarize, email to bitcoin ML stating we are setting the testnet activation start date as may 1st because we believe at this point the activation start date is likely the only consensus change remaining with segwit
12:18 < gmaxwell> Because it's testnet and the delayed start logic doesn't apply there, we don't care about creating turbulance there if miners upgrade ahead of nodes.
12:18 < wumpus> makes sense
12:18 < morcos> this will allow anyone to test their various versions of segwit (different implementations and backports) against each other potentially even before merging
12:19 < anchow101> morcos: ack
12:19 < morcos> gmaxwell: yes there is no reason to delay, but there is reason to agree on the start date so that we all activate at the same time
12:19 < gmaxwell> morcos: yes, may first is fine.
12:19 -!- anchow101 is now known as achow101
12:20 < btcdrak> ok so (1<<1) with activation may 1st for testnet, and (1<<1) and date TDB for mainnet
12:20 < jonasschnelli> ack
12:20 < achow101> yes
12:20 < morcos> btcdrak: ack
12:20 < paveljanik> ack
12:20 < morcos> but what does TDB stand for?  :)
12:21  * btcdrak palms face
12:21 < gmaxwell> Totally delicious burger.
12:21 < jl2012> ack 1 May testnet, how about expiry date?
12:21 < cfields> ack, but we need to get the gbt changes in place quickly so that testnet is a valid representation of what miners will be running
12:21 < btcdrak> j2012: 1 year. 
12:21 < morcos> ack 1 year
12:21 < BlueMatt> sgtm
12:21 < btcdrak> (1<<1) with activation may 1st and expiry 1 year for testnet, and (1<<1) and dates TBD for mainnet
12:21 < BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: when will we see testnet fork?
12:22 < morcos> cfields: can you summarize what GBT changes are needed still?
12:23 < morcos> does #7935 have anything at all to do with segwit?
12:23 < cfields> morcos: there's a proposal to bip9 that would require that miners set a flag signaling awareness of segwit
12:24 < cfields> *proposed amendment
12:25 < cfields> morcos: see https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/365
12:25 < morcos> ok i haven't read through all that but i kind of thought it was orthogonal to segwit.  we already have versionbits SF's in the process of being activated.  is segwit somehow materially different.  if not, lets not confuse the issues
12:26 < gmaxwell> morcos: it's just that a non-sw aware miner can't use GBT w/ segwit and keep mining while they can use CSV. 
12:27 < sdaftuar> gmaxwell: i don't follow why that is, can you explain?
12:27 < cfields> morcos: assuming that's adopted, some miners won't be creating blocks with commitments, so i'd like to make sure that we're testing on testnet. Otherwise it's not a great representation of mainnet mining.
12:27 < gmaxwell> I could be speaking out of my rear, my understanding at a distance was that non-SW ready gbt clients won't insert the commitment. 
12:27 < sdaftuar> but the commitment is created by bitcoind
12:28 < gmaxwell> sdaftuar: classical GBT does not include a coinbase transaction, the client generates it using information from the template.
12:28 < morcos> if can't use GBT means can't change the txs selected by bitcoind then maybe you're right, but that seems a secondary problem
12:28 < cfields> sdaftuar: if a miner is too old to understand how to insert the commitment, bitcoind can provide only non-witness txs, so that the miner continues to produce valid blocks
12:29 < morcos> maybe we should take this up after the meeting.   
12:29 < gmaxwell> sounds fine.
12:30 < cfields> ok. i only mentioned because i'd like to start upstreaming the mining/pool patches if we're going to deploy on testnet. And can't do that until the gbt stuff is finalized
12:30 < cfields> but fine to discuss later, i don't think it'll be an issue
12:31 < wumpus> ok, any other topics to be discussed?
12:31 < NicolasDorier> yes
12:31 < NicolasDorier> I just want opinion about
12:31 < NicolasDorier> making sure the wallet does not create uneconomical output based on current fees, and not based on mintxrelayfee (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7677)
12:31 < wumpus> nickler mentioned btcd segwit PR tests, but I'm not sure that was a topic suggestion
12:31 < morcos> cfields: i'd just like to distinguish between necessary changes and changes that are only needed if miners are going to be modifying the tx selection created by bitcoind.  the second category in my mind should not stand in the critical path
12:32 < NicolasDorier> I had problems with customers when mintxrelayfee where bump because occasionally wallet would produce bellow mintxrelayfee dust for other nods.
12:32 < wumpus> #topic uneconomical outputs in wallet based on current fees
12:32 < NicolasDorier> So I proposed to work on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7677
12:32 < nickler> wumpus: nope I was referring to the action item that mentioned roasbeefs implementation
12:32 < BlueMatt> also compact block bip, if anyone has bothered to read that
12:32 < wumpus> nickler: okay :)
12:32 < cfields> morcos: this has nothing to do with miners modifying tx output. it's that miners need to opt-in to segwit in order for bitcoind to give it witness tx. And that opt-in signal hasn't been implemented yet.
12:33 < gmaxwell> BlueMatt: was that a topic suggestion?
12:34 < wumpus> any opinions on the wallet issue mentioned by NicolasDorier?
12:34 < BlueMatt> gmaxwell: yes
12:34 < gmaxwell> NicolasDorier: I'll take a look at the issue.
12:34 < NicolasDorier> Breadwallet had issue also because of that when the mintxrelayfee was bumped
12:35 < NicolasDorier> so I think we should fix the wallet to not use mintxrelayfee
12:35 < NicolasDorier> but estimatedfee for determining the dust (only wallet part)
12:35 < NicolasDorier> would prevent having reliability issue in case it need to be increase in the future
12:35 < wumpus> it sounds sensible, wallet and relay policy are different things, although the mintxrelayfee should probably be the floor
12:36 < gmaxwell> or the dust threshould should just be made an infrequently changed fixed constant.
12:36 < NicolasDorier> gmaxwell: I am talking only about wallet, not relay policy
12:36 < NicolasDorier> ah
12:37 < NicolasDorier> I get your point. But well the problem would be the same with a constant. If we get a spam attack, we would increase it
12:37 < NicolasDorier> and then some wallet will produce below dust rejected by updated nodes
12:37 < morcos> yes, we should do both things
12:37 < gmaxwell> lets discuss on the issue.
12:37 < NicolasDorier> ok
12:37 < NicolasDorier> there is another quick topic I want to talk about
12:38 -!- GreenIsMyPepper [~GreenIsMy@2605:6400:20:11aa:189e:28a5:52ed:8948] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:38 < morcos> we should separate wallet functionality to use some smarter higher value for "dust" and the floor for dust shoudl be a separate variable than the muliple of min relay that it is now
12:38 < morcos> (floor for dust = policy relay limit for dust)
12:38 < NicolasDorier> ok, seems good I'll start working on it. It made me some pain nin the past
12:39 < gmaxwell> morcos: I agree.
12:39 < NicolasDorier> My other quick topic is
12:40 < NicolasDorier> long time ago I made a PR to remove unused flag and code
12:40 < NicolasDorier> on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7574
12:40 < NicolasDorier> morcos a jtimon had a better idea
12:40 < NicolasDorier> instead of removing the flag
12:40 < NicolasDorier> transforming it into one flag for all consensus stuff
12:40 < NicolasDorier> I'm thinking working on it but
12:41 < NicolasDorier> if I understand it seems to be better to do such kind of work after the merge of segwit ?
12:42 < gmaxwell> NicolasDorier: usually if that question arises the answer is yes.
12:42 < wumpus> yes I think for such non-trivial consensus refactoring it's better to wait until after segwit
12:43 < NicolasDorier> ok so I'll keep it for later
12:44 < wumpus> ok
12:44 < wumpus> #topic compact block bip
12:44 < gmaxwell> Next subject?
12:44 < gmaxwell> I read it!
12:45 < BlueMatt> you're the only one :'(
12:45 < sdaftuar> not true...
12:46 < gmaxwell> BlueMatt: would you like other people to read it?
12:46 < BlueMatt> I would :p
12:46 < BlueMatt> next topic?
12:47 < cfields> heh, ack
12:48 < cfields> (ack to reading)
12:48 < btcdrak> ^
12:48 < wumpus> so there's nothing about the contents to be discussed?
12:48 < BlueMatt> wumpus: not really...just hoping for feedback
12:48 < wumpus> that's what I mean, no feedback
12:48 < btcdrak> it's pretty dense reading, might need another week...
12:48 < BlueMatt> wumpus: I think all the outstanding decisions were concluded between gmaxwell and I
12:49 < BlueMatt> true
12:49 < gmaxwell> I gave a fair amount of feedback to Matt and he updated prior to putting it up.
12:49 < BlueMatt> so action to our army of devoted full-time code-reviwers? :p
12:49 < wumpus> (haven't read it yet)
12:49 < morcos> too much happening.  we need to clone ourselves.  at least wumpus
12:49 < gmaxwell> BlueMatt: when will the PR be up?
12:49 < BlueMatt> morcos: yea, that
12:49 < NicolasDorier> will read it. It takes me more time than most of you to understand it, can't say anything meaningful about it after reading it for 10min :p
12:49 < gmaxwell> BlueMatt: are you just waiting on feedback?
12:49 < BlueMatt> gmaxwell: I could do that this week...
12:49 < wumpus> #action read bluematt's compact block bip
12:49 < BlueMatt> gmaxwell: mostly
12:49 < wumpus> any URL?
12:50 < NicolasDorier> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012624.html ?
12:50 < BlueMatt> wumpus: https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bips/blob/master/bip-TODO.mediawiki
12:50 < wumpus> #link https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012624.html
12:50 < wumpus> #link https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bips/blob/master/bip-TODO.mediawiki
12:50 < wumpus> ok, any other topics?
12:52 < gmaxwell> Sounds like no.
12:52 < wumpus> hey not everyone is a fast typer :)
12:52 < wumpus> but indeed seems no
12:52 < NicolasDorier> well it's 4am here ! :p
12:53 < NicolasDorier> 5 sorry
12:53 < wumpus> #endmeeting
12:53 < lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu May  5 19:52:46 2016 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
12:53 < lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-05-05-19.01.html
12:53 < lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-05-05-19.01.txt
12:53 < lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-05-05-19.01.log.html
12:53 < jonasschnelli> Japan people work always!
12:53 < NicolasDorier> jonasschnelli: not this week figure out
12:53 < BlueMatt> hey, we're early!
12:53 < NicolasDorier> this is golden week :p
12:53 < wumpus> yes it's an inconvenient time for japan
12:54 < morcos> cfields: sorry if you guys have been going over all this GBT stuff already..  i tried looking through the code and BIP PR's but seems like there is a bunch of detailed GBT stuff in there that has pretty much nothing to do with how most miners use it as far as i can tell
12:54 < morcos> is the problem that miners will replace the coinbase entirely, because the commitment won't actually change if the miners aren't doing witness txs right, so as long as they kept the output, i dont' think they should care
12:55 < cfields> morcos: np. It's fresh on my mind because i looked at it yesterday/today, otherwise I'd be clueless
12:55 < sipa> back
12:55 < jonasschnelli> landed?
12:55 < cfields> morcos: no, either way, miners will be using what bitcoind provides. We're not talking about modifications here
12:55 < morcos> sipa: segwit activated on testnet while you were gone.  pretty awesome huh
12:56 < cfields> (er, "will be using what bitcoind provides" for the sake of this discussion)
12:56 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:56 < sipa> jonasschnelli: yes, sfo
12:56 < morcos> cfields: yes i understand that we have narrowed the discussion to that case (although since the PR's are not narrowed to that case, they are harder to get through)
12:57 < sdaftuar> so to clarify: bitcoind will be including a coinbase tx with a valid commitment in response to gbt, right?
12:57 < sipa> sdaftuar: if there is at least one witness transaction in the block, and there is no commitment already
12:57 < sipa> (i think)
12:58 < sdaftuar> sipa: agreed
12:58 < morcos> what i'm asking is why in that case is it necessary for the miner to be segwit aware?  changing the coinbase doesn't change the commitment, but i'm guessing the problem is that miners override all the coinbase outputs and so that commitment will be lost, and so bitcoind would have to do more work to add it back in and recalc the merkle for the header
12:58 -!- BashCo_ [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:58 < gmaxwell> morcos: norma gbt right now has no coinbase transaction in it.
12:58 < sdaftuar> ^ is morcos' guess here the issue?
12:59 < gmaxwell> normal*
13:00 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
13:02 < sdaftuar> gmaxwell: ah.  i am just now seeing where that coinbase gets stripped out of the response
13:02 -!- cryptapus [~cyptapus@unaffiliated/cryptapus] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
13:03 < cfields> right, what gmaxwell said. miners insert the coinbase. but old miners don't know to insert the extra txout.
13:04 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:04 < sdaftuar> ok understood now.  so the idea would be to add a mode where CreateNewBlock just doesn't pick witness transactions, which old miners could use?
13:04 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit]
13:04 < cfields> if you only give them non-witness tx's, they'll continue to function fine. if they opt-in for the new serialization, no need to filter
13:04 < cfields> sdaftuar: right.
13:04 < gmaxwell> sdaftuar: right, and that mode would be default unless a special flag was sent.
13:05 < sdaftuar> got it
13:05 < gmaxwell> meaning that there is a guarenteed way to deploy with no mining infra updates.
13:05 < sdaftuar> yep
13:06 < cfields> but also a false sense of security while testing. so that's why i'd like to have the opt-in ready for miners to turn on asap
13:07 < morcos> yes this makes sense to me now too.  but INCREDIBLY frustrating.  we have to rewrite the API for minings. it's absurd to have all this consensus critical logic outside of bitcoind by default.
13:08 < morcos> sdaftuar points out that extra nonce makes that hard to fix
13:10 < morcos> cfields: so is there a PR that does what you're suggesting?
13:11 < cfields> morcos: afaik there's no implementation of the BIP yet.
13:11 < cfields> luke-jr: have you coded something up, or should I jump on it?
13:11 < cfields> (sorry, proposed BIP changes)
13:13 < cfields> morcos: to be more specific: the bip changes are PR'd, but the specific segwit case isn't implemented yet afaik
13:13 < cfields> sec for link
13:13 < cfields> morcos: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7935
13:13 < morcos> yeah i saw that, but i meant the code that only selects non witness txs for the block
13:14 < cfields> i'm assuming no
13:23 -!- MrHodl [~fuc@5.175.208.109] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:27 < GitHub180> [bitcoin] kazcw opened pull request #8011: don't run ThreadMessageHandler at lowered priority (master...priority) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8011
13:31 < CodeShark> is meeting still underway?
13:31 < CodeShark> guess not..sorry I couldn't make it
13:33 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@167.225.61.94.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:35 -!- cloudnthings [7deca655@gateway/web/freenode/ip.125.236.166.85] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
13:36 -!- jtimon [~quassel@65.28.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:37 -!- schmidty [~schmidty@unaffiliated/schmidty] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
13:38 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@167.225.61.94.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
13:40 < tripleslash> CodeShark: [2016/05/05 14:52:47] <wumpus> #endmeeting
13:40 < tripleslash> so about 50 minutes ago.
13:44 < CodeShark> yeah, already read through the scrollback. thx :)
13:49 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:49 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:52 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:01 < gmaxwell> morcos: if only someone had suggested that any hardfork would mask out the constant zero bits in PREV in the header so miners could use it as nonce....
14:04 -!- TomMc [~tom@unaffiliated/tommc] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:07 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:12 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
14:17 -!- TomMc [~tom@unaffiliated/tommc] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:30 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:31 < instagibbs> BlueMatt, I assume the XOR-adding scheme wraps around mod 2^64  
14:31 < BlueMatt> instagibbs: yes
14:31 < BlueMatt> wait, no?
14:31 < BlueMatt> wait, whats your question?
14:32 < gmaxwell> he's asking if the addition is uint64_t addition, it is.
14:32 < BlueMatt> instagibbs: please suggest better wording
14:32 < BlueMatt> instagibbs: its this: https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoin/blob/udp/src/blockencodings.cpp#L37
14:34 < instagibbs> wasn't too confusing, but it wasn't stated in the bip
14:34 < instagibbs> (I'm also prejudiced from previous conversations so better to ask here)
14:34 < gmaxwell> I have a constructive proof that this scheme is not optimal but I don't think anyone cares.
14:37 < BlueMatt> yea, I'm not convinced its worth caring, and optimal versions are much more expensive
14:37 < BlueMatt> considering we're running that on so many txn, I'd prefer not.....
14:39 < gmaxwell> In an optimal scheme, for any to txids A and B, there should be a salt input C that makes them collide. If there is no such C, then someone trying to create collisions could avoid the pair A,B, and thus increase their success rate.  For this scheme, if A and B share the same even/oddness in each 64 bit word, then no C can make them collide. QED. 
14:39 < gmaxwell> Yes, I don't think it matters but it's useful to know that this exists.
14:40 < instagibbs> just mentioning uint8 in the definition would be best, ill continue reading post family business
14:40 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@167.225.61.94.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:43 < roasbeef> nickler: Yeah, the test coverage on my PR leaves much to be desired. Most of the lingering TODO’s are related to increasing test coverage across the various packages (txscript+blockchain especially).
14:44 < roasbeef> nickler: Once I get the tests in, I’ll be restructuring the commits as they’ve started to sprawl a bit as I’ve fixed bugs, tweaked API’s, etc. I’ve been busy with other non-bitcoin stuff (this whole graduating thing), but hope to get the PR to it’s final form (insert Frieza meme ;) ) in the next week or two.
14:45 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@167.225.61.94.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:55 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/spudowiar] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
15:24 -!- sipa [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:24 -!- sipa [~pw@2a02:348:86:3011::1] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:24 -!- sipa is now known as Guest89961
15:38 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@167.225.61.94.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:42 -!- pedrobranco [~pedrobran@167.225.61.94.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
15:42 -!- assder [82ebca3a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.130.235.202.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
15:48 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:50 -!- BashCo_ [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
15:54 -!- TomMc [~tom@unaffiliated/tommc] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:06 < nickler> roasbeef: sounds great! My comment was not meant to be judging; the idea was to exchange tests between multiple implementations if possible. Let me know when you've worked on the PR again. Good luck with your graduating thing. 
16:10 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:14 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
16:15 -!- murch [~murch@p4FE3A502.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
16:17 < warren> A popular RPM package of Bitcoin uses this patch: https://togami.com/~warren/temp/2016/bitcoin-0.12.0-destchange.patch
16:18 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)]
16:18 < warren> To get rid of this patch what should we upstream?  Matt's guess was to add an optional parameter to an RPC
16:19 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:23 < roasbeef> nickler: No worries, I took no offense :). Great, I think there's a lot of value in exchanging tests across implementations. I plan to port over core's new json script, sighash and transaction tests to btcd. I'll contribute any additional cases I add upstream to core.
16:30 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:34 < GitHub80> [bitcoin] Tyler-Hardin opened pull request #8012: Qt: Delay user confirmation of send (master...send-delay) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8012
17:01 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
17:08 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:10 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:39 -!- randy-waterhouse [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/randy-waterhouse] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:47 -!- jonasschnelli [~jonasschn@unaffiliated/jonasschnelli] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
17:48 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:48 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
17:49 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:51 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:52 -!- jonasschnelli [~jonasschn@2a01:4f8:200:7025::2] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:11 -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
18:15 -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:25 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
18:27 < GitHub63> [bitcoin] wtogami opened pull request #8013: doc: Fedora build requirements, add gcc-c++ and fix typo (master...fedora_build_readme2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8013
18:27 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-122-14-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
18:29 -!- Guest89961 [~pw@2a02:348:86:3011::1] has quit [Changing host]
18:29 -!- Guest89961 [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:29 -!- Guest89961 is now known as sipa
18:32 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:54 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
19:01 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-upobqorwblvlurox] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
19:41 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:03 < luke-jr> warren: I see no valid use case for that patch…
20:06 < luke-jr> morcos: right now, GBT is broken in 0.12.1 due to BIP9
20:07 < luke-jr> cfields: there is a PR for the GBT BIP9 changes already
20:07 < luke-jr> if that's what you were asking
20:09 < warren> luke-jr: I think it exposes the change address that is configurable in the coin control GUI 
20:10 < luke-jr> warren: once per startup, which makes no sense unless you're starting bitcoind JUST to send once
20:10 < warren> luke-jr: right, which is why Matt thought it made more sense as an RPC option
20:10 < luke-jr> yeah, probably
20:11 < warren> in any case it isn't my problem
20:11 < luke-jr> I *think* There's a PR open for it too
20:11 < warren> oh?
20:12 < luke-jr> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7518
20:14 < warren> That doesn't help sendtoaddress right?
20:15 < luke-jr> of course not, it doesn't make sense for sendtoaddress
20:15 < luke-jr> sendtoaddress is a simple RPC for normal users
20:15 < luke-jr> normal users should never be messing with change addresses
20:17 < sipa> for fundrawtransaction it may make sense
20:18 < sipa> (i'm surprised it doesn't already have it?0
20:18 < luke-jr> yes, that's what the PR does
20:18 < luke-jr> note it is merged
20:31 < warren> In discussion with cfields today we decided it would be nice and not too difficult to improve the makefiles and gitian such that "make rpm" and "make deb" would work and be used during the ordinary gitian-linux process.  It can spit out deterministic deb and rpm's during the existing gitian build process.  They can be subsequently GPG signed in a similar manner to the OSX and Windows installers.
20:33 < warren> After this is done I will make the recommendation to Fedora that they do NOT want to build and maintain their own Bitcoin RPM, mostly because they EOL distros very quickly and people will be stuck with old versions of Bitcoin.  Installing Bitcoin should be a conscious process not subject to auto-update either.
20:40 < GitHub1> [bitcoin] Tyler-Hardin opened pull request #8014: Qt: Sort transactions by date (master...sort-by-date) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8014
20:56 < luke-jr> warren: how will that deal with ABI issues between distros?
21:11 -!- BashCo_ [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:13 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:16 < GitHub62> [bitcoin] 21E14 opened pull request #8015: CCoinsViewErrorCatcher raison-d-etre (master...wrapper) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8015
21:40 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:49 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
21:49 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:52 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has quit [Quit: bye]
22:39 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
22:41 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
23:04 < warren> luke-jr: you don't, the gitian build contains static libraries
23:05 < warren> If you use "make rpm" or "make deb" on your own distro you get a dynamic binary.
23:06 -!- PRab_ [~chatzilla@c-68-55-113-152.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:07 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@c-68-55-113-152.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
23:08 -!- PRab_ is now known as PRab
23:18 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:21 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:24 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
23:38 -!- gill3s [~textual@37.165.244.100] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:40 -!- jannes [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:44 -!- BashCo_ [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:44 -!- gill3s [~textual@37.165.244.100] has quit [Changing host]
23:44 -!- gill3s [~textual@unaffiliated/gill3s] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:53 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
23:54 -!- murch [~murch@p4FE3BBCA.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:59 -!- fengling [~fengling@111.198.29.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev