--- Log opened Thu Oct 15 00:00:47 2020
00:02 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
00:11 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:11 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:12 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:13 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:13 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider pushed 27 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f2e6d1443013...8ed37f6c8497
00:13 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 54729f3 Andrew Chow: Add libsqlite3
00:13 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e87df82 Andrew Chow: Add sqlite to travis and depends
00:13 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7577b6e Andrew Chow: Add SQLiteDatabase and SQLiteBatch dummy classes
00:13 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
00:14 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:14 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider merged pull request #19077: wallet: Add sqlite as an alternative wallet database and use it for new descriptor wallets (master...sqlite-wallet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19077
00:14 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
00:14 < aj> \o/
00:14 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00 [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:2143:af3d:c6b2:a825] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:15 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
00:15 < meshcollider> achow101: 🥳
00:16 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00_ [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:e05c:9fd2:1de6:ce2e] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
00:45 -!- vincenzopalazzo [~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:9867:273:d21b:c6c] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:46 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:47 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:48 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:cdf:9623:201e:a1d8] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
00:56 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
00:57 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:57 -!- jouke [~jouke@unaffiliated/komkommer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:03 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:07 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:08 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:13 -!- Guyver2 [Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:19 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
01:23 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:23 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 20 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8ed37f6c8497...3caee1694657
01:23 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f8c099e Pieter Wuille: --- [TAPROOT] Refactors ---
01:23 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 107b57d Pieter Wuille: scripted-diff: put ECDSA in name of signature functions
01:23 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8bd2b4e Pieter Wuille: refactor: rename scriptPubKey in VerifyWitnessProgram to exec_script
01:23 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
01:23 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:23 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #19953: Implement BIP 340-342 validation (Schnorr/taproot/tapscript) (master...taproot) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19953
01:23 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
01:24 < sipa> \\\o///
01:25 < jonatack> boom \o/
01:30 < wumpus> \o/
01:30  * sipa does the tapdance
01:31 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:31 < sipa> actually wait no, i can't dance
01:31 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@gateway/tor-sasl/sdaftuar] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:31 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@gateway/tor-sasl/sdaftuar] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:35 < wumpus> (don't let it being merged stop you from reviewing further if you were still in progress)
01:35  * wumpus neither
01:37 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:37 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #20152: doc: Update wallet files in files.md (master...201015-sqlite) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20152
01:37 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
01:37 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@67.23.55.162] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:42 < sipa> what is the meeting topic command?
01:42 -!- jonatack [~jon@109.202.107.147] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
01:43 < MarcoFalke> #proposedmeetingtopic
01:43 < MarcoFalke> Is there anything left to discuss, now that everything is merged?
01:44 < sipa> #proposedmeetingtopic taproot relay policy / activation on testnet/signet
01:47 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@c-73-15-215-148.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
01:47 < wumpus> also wanted to get it merged so that other pre-0.21 PRs don't make it require rebase
01:47 < wumpus> with that many ACKs
01:51 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex]
01:52 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:53 < MarcoFalke> Makes sense, and as the code is not active yet, it can still be changed freely
01:56 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:56 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3caee1694657...3956165903cf
01:56 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6020ce3 Gregory Sanders: DecodeHexTx: Try case where txn has inputs first
01:56 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 27fc6a3 Gregory Sanders: DecodeHexTx: Break out transaction decoding logic into own function
01:56 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3956165 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #17775: DecodeHexTx: Try case where txn has inputs first
01:56 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
01:58 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:58 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #17775: DecodeHexTx: Try case where txn has inputs first (master...decode_wit_first) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17775
01:58 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
02:00 -!- larsivi [~larsivi@s91904426.blix.com] has quit []
02:07 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
02:10 < kallewoof> Won't be at meeting but my 2 sats on signet and taproot activation: I don't think there's a reason to delay activation. My suggestion is to set activation for a week or so from now (long enough for a trivial pull request to get ACKs and be merged + to update the servers issuing blocks). I guess the question is whether this is affected by feature freeze or not. If it is, I suggest we activate it after 0.21 branch split in 
02:10 < kallewoof> master only.
02:11 < kallewoof> If people want to try out the actual real taproot activation mechanism for activation on signet, the story changes I guess.
02:12 < sipa> kallewoof: the nice thing about signet is that really consensus rules are decided by the signers - even if the rest of the network doesn't enforce
02:12 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
02:13 < sipa> the reason i brought it up is that i realize that master will now relay (valid) taproot spends... which may be unexpected, and feels wrong without activation plan
02:13 < kallewoof> sipa: yeah, but p2p layer is affected... propagation can be delayed or fail unless one peer is a miner
02:14 < kallewoof> sipa: in pre-activation? i thought it policy-rejected
02:14 < sipa> kallewoof: no
02:15 < sipa> i think segwit had special rules about relay before activation, because it was also a p2p change
02:15 < kallewoof> ohh! i didn't realize that.
02:15 < aj> sipa: (if the network enforces rules prior to "real" activation, and there's a hard-fork, you need more than just signers to fix things up)
02:15 < aj> sipa: (probably no need for hard-forks in the taproot implementation now though so, whatevs)
02:15 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:16 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:17 < sipa> the last softfork before that, CSV, was implemented & activated in the same release, 0.12.1
02:18 < sipa> but i think we should disable relay for networks which have no activation defined (i.e., all but regtest and maybe signet)
02:20 < kallewoof> sipa: my vote is to keep it enabled on signet, as that means we can just flip it on whenever and it will just work™️
02:21 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:22 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.211] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:27 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:27 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack closed pull request #19874: cli, bugfix: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers (master...getinfo-handle-older-servers-gracefully) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19874
02:27 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
02:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:28 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack reopened pull request #19874: cli, bugfix: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers (master...getinfo-handle-older-servers-gracefully) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19874
02:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
02:28 < kallewoof> I get the sneaky suspicion that enum class with bit fiddling is... not the way to go. Tempted to just do const uint8_t's and skip the enum part altogether..
02:30 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:30 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #19997: History for Taproot PR #19953 (master...taproot-history) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19997
02:30 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
02:32 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex]
02:33 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:33 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
02:37 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:38 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.211] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:38 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@67.23.55.162] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
02:40 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.104.51] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:43 -!- mol_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:45 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:45 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3956165903cf...e3b474c54866
02:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 883cea7 Pieter Wuille: Restore compatibility with old CSubNet serialization
02:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 886be97 Pieter Wuille: Ignore incorrectly-serialized banlist.dat entries
02:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e3b474c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20140: Restore compatibility with old CSubNet serialization
02:45 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
02:45 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
02:45 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:45 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20140: Restore compatibility with old CSubNet serialization (master...202010_subnet_ser_compact) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20140
02:45 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
02:46 -!- mol [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
02:47 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex]
02:47 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.104.51] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
02:50 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.10] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:51 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:51 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e3b474c54866...560dea9b26f7
02:51 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d681a28 Luke Dashjr: RPC: getpeerinfo: Deprecate "whitelisted" field (replaced by "permissions")
02:51 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5b57dc5 Luke Dashjr: RPC: getpeerinfo: Wrap long help line for bytesrecv_per_msg
02:51 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 560dea9 MarcoFalke: Merge #19770: RPC: getpeerinfo: Deprecate "whitelisted" field (replaced by...
02:51 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
02:52 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:52 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #19770: RPC: getpeerinfo: Deprecate "whitelisted" field (replaced by "permissions") (master...deprecate_whitelisted) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19770
02:52 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
02:56 -!- BjarniRunar1 [~BjarniRun@185.163.110.116] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:58 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:01 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:01 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/560dea9b26f7...711ddce94377
03:01 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master faad92f MarcoFalke: test: Remove unused nVersion=1 in p2p tests
03:01 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 711ddce Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20131: test: Remove unused nVersion=1 in p2p tests
03:01 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
03:02 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:02 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20131: test: Remove unused nVersion=1 in p2p tests (master...2010-testnVersion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20131
03:02 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
03:10 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
03:12 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:14 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:18 -!- Coralie12Moscisk [~Coralie12@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:23 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.10] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
03:23 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:24 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:25 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.104.51] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:27 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:28 -!- csknk [~csknk@unaffiliated/csknk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:32 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Client Quit]
03:34 -!- lightningbot [~supybot@2400:8901::f03c:91ff:febb:bbc1] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:35 -!- csknk [~csknk@unaffiliated/csknk] has quit [Quit: leaving]
03:37 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:38 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:38 -!- aj [aj@cerulean.erisian.com.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
03:39 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.104.51] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:40 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.172.104.51] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:41 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.172.104.51] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:41 -!- jonatack__ [~jon@37.172.104.51] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:43 -!- Coralie12Moscisk [~Coralie12@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
03:48 -!- braydonf [~braydon@gateway/tor-sasl/braydonf] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
03:53 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.164.124.179] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:55 -!- jonatack__ [~jon@37.172.104.51] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
04:00 -!- braydonf [~braydon@gateway/tor-sasl/braydonf] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:01 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
04:04 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:09 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
04:14 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:14 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] S3RK opened pull request #20153: wallet: do not import a descriptor with hardened derivations into a watch-only wallet (master...importdesc_silent_fail) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20153
04:14 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
04:17 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:17 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.164.124.179] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
04:21 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:22 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:23 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:24 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:25 -!- filchef [~filchef@212.104.97.177] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:25 -!- aj [aj@cerulean.erisian.com.au] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:31 -!- lightningbot [~supybot@2400:8901::f03c:91ff:febb:bbc1] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:32 -!- tralfaz [~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:32 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:32 -!- davterra [~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:32 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:33 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:34 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:35 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00_ [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:cd4c:702d:88ca:b535] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:35 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00 [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:2143:af3d:c6b2:a825] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
04:37 -!- Eagle[TM] [~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
04:38 -!- EagleTM [~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:42 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00 [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:3450:12e3:687c:73f4] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:42 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00_ [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:cd4c:702d:88ca:b535] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
04:54 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00_ [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:5466:9bbd:3b64:fa0a] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:55 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00 [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:3450:12e3:687c:73f4] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
04:59 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00_ [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:5466:9bbd:3b64:fa0a] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
05:00 -!- BjarniRunar1 [~BjarniRun@185.163.110.116] has quit []
05:04 -!- kristapsk___ [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:04 -!- kristapsk_ [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:08 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00 [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:5c74:cca3:7cf:56db] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:22 -!- kerbyu [~kerbyu@217.146.82.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:33 < jamesob> wow, big merge day. congrats sipa, achow101!
05:35 < elichai2> 🥳🥳🥳🥳
05:38 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00_ [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:c407:85d0:bcbe:4132] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:39 -!- Ga1aCt1Cz00 [~Ga1aCt1Cz@2a02:810a:8d40:5ebc:5c74:cca3:7cf:56db] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
05:46 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:49 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:49 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof opened pull request #20154: BIP-322 support (master...202010-bip322) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20154
05:49 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
05:50 < kallewoof> andytoshi: hope you didn't spend too much time on your implementation. I have begun working on a rough implementation of BIP 322 support here, FYI: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20154
05:52 -!- willcl_ark is now known as [github-bot]
05:53 < hebasto> is #20120 rtm?
05:53 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20120 | net, rpc, test, bugfix: update GetNetworkName, GetNetworksInfo, regression tests by jonatack · Pull Request #20120 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
05:54 < andytoshi> kallewoof: no, i spent about 30 minutes on it :) the old spec was super straightforward (at least, with the existing rust-bitcoin/miniscript infrastructure i have)
05:55 < andytoshi> the new spec is bigger but i think will integrate much better with my descriptors library
05:55 -!- molz_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:56 < kallewoof> andytoshi: it seems to integrate really well with bitcoin core, from what i can tell so far. the old code was a split out thing of its own
05:56 < kallewoof> andytoshi: cool to hear you're working on it. feedback and such super welcome :)
05:57 -!- molz_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:57 < andytoshi> right, that's also what was going to happen with the rust-miniscript implementation ... de/serialization was easy but then providing a usable sign/verify API seemed pretty unnatural. i think this one will be better because i can write a function that takes a descriptor + message and converts it to a to_spend transaction
05:57 -!- molz_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:57 < andytoshi> (and i guess now, will also take a value ... i'm curious why you changed this this morning...i don't have strong feelings either way, i just don't understand it)
05:57 -!- [github-bot] is now known as wilcl_ark
05:58 -!- mol_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
06:00 < kallewoof> andytoshi: uh... i somehow thought the sum of amounts was required in the signature, but now that you mention it, i think i was confused..
06:01 < kallewoof> andytoshi: I'll revert that one now. Thanks for pointing it out
06:03 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:05 < andytoshi> cool :) the value made it a little harder, API-wise, because it means that you need to know upfront whether you're going to use the to_spend purely as a dummy input when proving funds, or not (and you have to konw how many funds you're planning to prove)
06:05 < andytoshi> you sorta have to know this now, in choosing whether to use an OP_TRUE descriptor or a "real" one
06:05 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:06 < kallewoof> andytoshi: that makes sense -- yeah, i think i managed to convince myself that the signatures commit to the amounts, so we need to have those available and why not just stuff them in the virtual to_sign tx... but that's not how it works at all.
06:06 < luke-jr> oh blah, sqlite isn't optional? :/
06:07 -!- Exho [~Echoplex@139.180.171.37] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:08  * MarcoFalke updates all build scripts to install sqlite-dev
06:09 < MarcoFalke> This is probably the first time a dependecy has been added in years. Others were only removals.
06:09  * luke-jr begins on a PR to fix it optional
06:10 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
06:18  * kallewoof calls it a day at "checker.CheckECDSASignature(vchSig, vchPubKey, scriptCode, sigversion)" returning false. :) Will compare sighashes tomorrow. Maybe I should've implemented this in btcdeb first.
06:20 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net]
06:21 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:26 -!- tralfaz is now known as davterra
06:28 < andytoshi> kallewoof: sounds good, hopefully i'll have some test vectors in the next 6-8 hours we can compare
06:29 < kallewoof> andytoshi: nice!
06:29 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@ptr-93-89-242-235.ip.airwire.ie] has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.7.5 - https://znc.in]
06:30 -!- kerbyu [~kerbyu@217.146.82.202] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:31 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has quit [Quit: jonatack]
06:31 -!- doomas [~doomas@94.229.74.91] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:31 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@ptr-93-89-242-235.ip.airwire.ie] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:33 -!- shesek [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:33 -!- shesek [~shesek@164.90.217.137] has quit [Changing host]
06:33 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:33 -!- mol [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:36 -!- molz_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
06:38 -!- jonatack [~jon@109.232.227.138] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:45 -!- kexkey [~kexkey@89.36.78.10] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:45 -!- glozow [uid453516@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-gxlwpojdyoxusxnv] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:53 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:53 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #20156: Make sqlite support optional (compile-time) (master...opt_sqlite) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20156
06:53 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
07:06 -!- vincenzopalazzo [~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:9867:273:d21b:c6c] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
07:11 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:12 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:16 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:16 < jamesob> anyone ever seen "/usr/bin/ld: error: [...]: <corrupt x86 property (0xc0000002) size: 0x8>" during compilation before? I'm getting a truckload of them, but compilation seems to succeed anyway. Think it has to do with having installed the debian gcc-9 package, but not sure. Google turns up nothing.
07:16 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:16 -!- davterra [~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:16 -!- davterra [~davterra@gateway/tor-sasl/tralfaz] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:18 < jamesob> s/compilation/link & ar time
07:24 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:31 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:32 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:34 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:34 < yanmaani> jamesob: yeah, me too
07:34 < yanmaani> what OS?
07:34 -!- promag [~promag@dsl-5-27.bl27.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:34 < jamesob> Linux slug 4.19.0-10-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.19.132-1 (2020-07-24) x86_64 GNU/Linux
07:35 < yanmaani> I use gcc 8.3.0 @ debian (devuan)
07:35 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1 | JSON-RPC support for mobile devices ("ultra-lightweight" clients) · Issue #1 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
07:35 < jamesob> I get it when compiling with gcc or clang; I think it's an issue with ld/ar
07:35 < yanmaani> Linux hostname 4.19.0-10-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.19.132-1 (2020-07-24) x86_64 GNU/Linux
07:35 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1 | JSON-RPC support for mobile devices ("ultra-lightweight" clients) · Issue #1 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
07:35 < promag> does it make sense to support multiple -blocksdir where one is rw but the others are ro? so that older blocks can be kept on a slower disk?
07:36 < yanmaani> promag: you may be interested in overlayfs
07:36 < yanmaani> or just some caching setup
07:37 < luke-jr> promag: probably
07:37 < promag> yanmaani: yes, I though about that, but then in instead of prunning it would move blocks the the other place
07:37 < luke-jr> promag: needs some thought, though, as it also makes sense to move them automatically
07:37 < promag> luke-jr: right
07:37 < yanmaani> uh, how are you going to automatically move blocks to a RO fs?
07:38 < luke-jr> FWIW Signet may be broken on master since it lacks Taproot activation params
07:38 < promag> yanmaani: no, I mean RO as in bitcoind doesn't writes new blocks there
07:38 < yanmaani> the simple solution is to have a cronjob that checks mtime/ctime and moves+symlinks them
07:38 < yanmaani> oh, not a RO fs
07:38 < yanmaani> just do overlayfs or something IMO
07:39 < promag> not ro fs, "RO" -blocksdir
07:40 < promag> yanmaani: I understand this can be overcome out of bitcoind, but the idea would be to add a -prunestrategy=archive for instance
07:40 < luke-jr> yanmaani: for example, it can be an external drive you unplug when you leave home
07:40 < promag> just a thought..
07:41 < luke-jr> and blocks would just not prune-to-slow-storage while you're away from home
07:41 < luke-jr> when you get back, then they move
07:41 < yanmaani> luke-jr: But then you have a problem when you start bitcoind in such cases, no?
07:41 < promag> luke-jr: exactly
07:41 < luke-jr> and if you need to use (eg) a rescan RPC, you plug in the drive
07:41 < promag> it can be copy first, then delete old
07:41 < luke-jr> yanmaani: that's exactly what this would avoid
07:42 < yanmaani> I guess if you have the DB, yeah. Couldn't it just ignore missing blocks until they're needed?
07:42 < promag> yup
07:42 < yanmaani> so you can do whatever you want and bitcoind will just deal with it
07:42 < promag> this might interact with assumeutxo cc jamesob
07:42 < yanmaani> instead of re-implementing overlayfs in bitcoin core
07:43 < promag> yanmaani: overlayfs is cool if you dont care where each file is stored
07:43 < promag> and it's platform dependant
07:43 < yanmaani> you can move them around by yourself though
07:43 < yanmaani> or just set a cronjob to move+symlink
07:44 < promag> yes I could
07:44 < promag> or have it automatic
07:44 < jamesob> promag: should be compatible with assumeutxo since blocksdir access is largely unchanged; blocks have always come out of order anyway
07:45 < jamesob> well... not always, but for a while :)
07:45 -!- Mercury_Vapor [~Mercury_V@174-082-166-092.res.spectrum.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
07:45 < promag> jamesob: but what happens if you have to validate and a block isn't there?
07:46 < jamesob> promag: validation doesn't require access to blockfiles per se because all the data you're relying on is stored in (i) the headers chain and (ii) the utxo set
07:47 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:47 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #20157: Bugfix: chainparams: Add missing (disabled) Taproot deployment for Signet (master...signet_taproot_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20157
07:47 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
07:47 < provoostenator> I'd like to nominate https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/96 for v0.21 too
07:48 < provoostenator> Also note it's impossible to create an unnamed wallet with the GUI atm
07:49 < promag> jamesob: https://github.com/jamesob/assumeutxo-docs/tree/2019-04-proposal/proposal#do-you-perform-any-extra-validation-on-a-loaded-snapshot-besides-comparing-its-hash-to-the-assumeutxo-value
07:49 < promag> jamesob: but if blocks are available locally then this is not required right?
07:50 < promag> "this" as in ibd
07:50 < jamesob> promag: ibd is still required to make sure that the blocks on disk render into the utxo set that you expect
07:51 < jamesob> I guess that'd be more like a reindex
07:52 < promag> thanks jamesob
07:52 < jamesob> sure thing
07:52 -!- Mercury_Vapor [~Mercury_V@174-082-166-092.res.spectrum.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:00 -!- doomas [~doomas@94.229.74.91] has quit []
08:01 < jamesob> man it is now amazingly hard to replicate the slew of CI errors locally
08:03 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:7c62:66c0:4ac3:4969] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:04 < sdaftuar> i thought it was a video game where you keep clicking the re-run button til it passes?
08:04  * sdaftuar ducks
08:05 < promag> sdaftuar: like go away pls
08:06 < promag> luke-jr: another approach would be -prunedir which if set it would move there instead of deleting
08:06 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:06 < luke-jr> promag: keep in mind it may be desirable to actually prune too
08:07 < luke-jr> promag: eg, keep blocks with your own txs in them in storage, but prune everything else
08:08 < promag> that requires to have wallets loaded
08:08 < luke-jr> not necessarily (see prune locks)
08:09 < promag> ah you mean #19463
08:09 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19463 | Prune locks by luke-jr · Pull Request #19463 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
08:10 < luke-jr> promag: anyway, my point is it probably shouldn't literally hijack the pruning logic
08:10 < luke-jr> it is fundamentally different
08:10 < promag> don't want to change the logic
08:10 < promag> just want to s/delete/move
08:12 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
08:14 -!- Emcy [~Emcy@unaffiliated/emcy] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:15 -!- Emcy [~Emcy@unaffiliated/emcy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:22 -!- gonemad3 [~gonemad3@89.47.234.28] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:28 < luke-jr> #proposedmeetingtopic Getting BIP 8 logic in before freeze
08:28 < yanmaani> https://travis-ci.org/github/namecoin/namecoin-core/jobs/736047101 What could cause this Travis failure? It seems to relate to #11394 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/6e4e98ee8ce2da3cca2e2fd210e9e8dbc9b1c936
08:28 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11394 | Perform a weaker subtree check in Travis by sipa · Pull Request #11394 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
08:29 -!- kabaum [~kabaum@h-13-35.A163.priv.bahnhof.se] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:44 -!- kristapsk___ is now known as kristapsk
08:45 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:45 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 6 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/711ddce94377...0d2248235375
08:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6df7882 Jon Atack: net: add peer network to CNodeStats
08:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4938a10 Jon Atack: rpc, test: expose CNodeStats network in RPC getpeerinfo
08:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5133fab Jon Atack: cli: simplify -netinfo using getpeerinfo network field
08:45 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
08:45 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:45 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20002: net, rpc, cli: expose peer network in getpeerinfo; simplify/improve -netinfo (master...getpeerinfo-GetNetClass) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20002
08:45 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
08:51 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@c-73-34-43-4.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:51 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:7c62:66c0:4ac3:4969] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:52 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:7c62:66c0:4ac3:4969] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:55 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:04 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:7c62:66c0:4ac3:4969] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:04 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:7c62:66c0:4ac3:4969] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:13 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@c-73-15-215-148.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:15 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
09:17 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
09:21 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@mail.dargis.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:22 < hebasto> provoostenator: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/96
09:22 < hebasto> provoostenator: agree about 0.21
09:47 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:7c62:66c0:4ac3:4969] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:47 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:7c62:66c0:4ac3:4969] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:50 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:51 -!- andreacab [~andreacab@2a02:120b:2c22:e0c0:7c62:66c0:4ac3:4969] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
09:52 -!- ossifrage [~ossifrage@unaffiliated/ossifrage] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
10:15 < yanmaani> Do you get my posts to the bitcoin-dev list? I can see them online, but I get the "your message awaits approval" message 
10:38 -!- davec [~davec@072-183-054-196.res.spectrum.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
10:42 -!- davec [~davec@072-183-054-196.res.spectrum.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:57 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
10:58 < provoostenator> #16546 can be dropped from the high priority list: it won't make it into 0.21 and hardware wallets already have a project
10:58 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16546 | External signer support - Wallet Box edition by Sjors · Pull Request #16546 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
10:58 < provoostenator> That said, it now works with Sqlite!
10:59 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit []
11:00 -!- gonemad3 [~gonemad3@89.47.234.28] has quit []
11:02 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has quit [Write error: Connection reset by peer]
11:05 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:06 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:06 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:09 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:16 -!- joerodgers [~joerodger@141.98.255.150] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:20 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:20 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 8 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0d2248235375...9855422e65ca
11:20 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 567008d Hennadii Stepanov: p2p: Add DumpAnchors()
11:20 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c29272a Hennadii Stepanov: p2p: Add ReadAnchors()
11:20 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master bad16af Hennadii Stepanov: p2p: Add CConnman::GetCurrentBlockRelayOnlyConns()
11:20 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
11:21 -!- Lthere [~Lthere@185.204.1.185] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:22 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:22 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #17428: p2p: Try to preserve outbound block-relay-only connections during restart (master...20191109-anchors) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17428
11:22 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
11:26 < phantomcircuit> sipa, can an attacker with access to the private key generate two signatures from the same private key for the same message?
11:26 < phantomcircuit> with schnorr signatures?
11:27 < phantomcircuit> i assume so
11:27 < sipa> generally you don't call someone with a private key an attacker ;)
11:27 < sdaftuar> "signer"
11:27 < sipa> but yes - the term you're looking for (i think) is a "unique signature", and no EC based signature schemes are
11:27 < phantomcircuit> sipa, if they're trying to abuse poorly written wallet software they are :P
11:27 < sdaftuar> "user"
11:28 < phantomcircuit> that's what i thought
11:28 < phantomcircuit> it's still an attacker... just not of the signature scheme itself
11:28 < jeremyrubin> I think phantomcircuit is more asking if a signing oracle will ever generate different signatures for same msg
11:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:28 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dongcarl opened pull request #20158: tree-wide: De-globalize ChainstateManager (master...2020-06-libbitcoinruntime) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20158
11:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
11:28 < sipa> phantomcircuit: to be clear, the bip340 signing algorithm is deterministic if no auxiliary randomness is used
11:29 < phantomcircuit> jeremyrubin, not if they will, but if they can, which sipa has answered
11:29 < sipa> but nobody is required (or can be verified to) follow that algorithm
11:29 < phantomcircuit> sipa, yeah i understand now, i was confused by the bip340 language about malleability
11:30 < sipa> there is one context where we actually treat someone with a private key as an attacker in BIP340, and it's a rather unusual requirement: nobody (even those with private keys) should be able to construct a signature for which the single-sig validation and batch-validation algorithm produce a different result (with more than negligible probability)
11:30 < phantomcircuit> i thought that my original reading was unlikely so im here asking :)
11:30 < sipa> well, i don't think it should be an unusual requirement - but in practice it seems it's not part of the standard attack model for signatures
11:30 < phantomcircuit> sipa, indeed cause then you could validate a transaction that is then rejected by block validation, would be a nasty issue
11:32 < sipa> in ed25519 land, this property clearly does not hold: https://hdevalence.ca/blog/2020-10-04-its-25519am
11:33 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:33 < sipa> and it's trivial to make signatures (with private key) that validate in some implementations and not others, with tons of variants
11:34 < phantomcircuit> sipa, for most signature scheme use the cost of rejecting a signature that would be valid elsewhere is typically zero
11:35 < phantomcircuit> this is a sort of unique case in which everybody has to actually 100% agree
11:37 < phantomcircuit> sipa, do you know ballpark how many signatures are in a typical 'full' block right now?
11:40 < sipa> around 6000 txins per block, and i assume only a fraction have more than one signature
11:42 < jeremyrubin> #proposedmeetingtopic small announcement on behalf of BGIN
11:46 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9855422e65ca...9ad7cd2887ab
11:46 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3069b56 Amiti Uttarwar: [doc] Improve help for getpeerinfo connection_type field.
11:46 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 41dca08 Amiti Uttarwar: [trivial] Extract connection type doc into file where it is used.
11:46 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9ad7cd2 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20090: [doc] Tiny followups to new getpeerinfo connection type fiel...
11:46 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
11:46 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20090: [doc] Tiny followups to new getpeerinfo connection type field  (master...2020-09-getpeerinfo-conn-type-release-notes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20090
11:46 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
11:49 -!- lightlike [~lightlike@p200300c7ef18aa0064f9e41f2f81eec6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:50 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex]
11:58 -!- promag_ [~promag@dsl-5-27.bl27.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:59 -!- promag_ [~promag@dsl-5-27.bl27.telepac.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:00 -!- promag_ [~promag@dsl-5-27.bl27.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:00 < wumpus> #startmeeting
12:00 < lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Oct 15 19:00:27 2020 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
12:00 < lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
12:00 < provoostenator> hi
12:00 -!- promag [~promag@dsl-5-27.bl27.telepac.pt] has quit [Disconnected by services]
12:00 < emzy> hi
12:00 < hebasto> hi
12:00 < jnewbery> hi
12:00 < luke-jr> hi
12:00 < kanzure> hi
12:00 -!- promag_ is now known as promag
12:01 < promag> hi
12:01 -!- promag_ [~promag@176.79.5.27] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:01 < wumpus> two proposed topics taproot relay policy / activation on testnet/signet (sipa),  Getting BIP 8 logic in before freeze (luke-jr)
12:01 < luke-jr> wumpus: there was a third by jeremyrubin O.o
12:01 < luke-jr> [18:42:09] <jeremyrubin> #proposedmeetingtopic small announcement on behalf of BGIN
12:01 < jonatack> hi
12:02 < elichai2> hi
12:02 < wumpus> PSA today is the feature freeze for 0.21, it seems we managed to merge all the features on the milestone 
12:02 < wumpus> luke-jr: strange, didn't see it in http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/proposedmeetingtopics.txt
12:02 < luke-jr> wumpus: thought it was tomorrow? :x
12:02 < provoostenator> Note that the GUI repo doesn't have a milestone
12:02 < MarcoFalke> provoostenator: Right. Is there any feature we missed from the GUI?
12:02 < MarcoFalke> bugfixes can go in any time
12:02 < luke-jr> [16:22:11] <hebasto> provoostenator: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/96
12:02 < wumpus> there are some PRs left of course, but nothing that can be labeled feature imo https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3A0.21.0
12:03 < wumpus> provoostenator: good point, didn't look at the gui repo at all
12:03 < luke-jr> wumpus: would be nice to get some of BIP 8 in, so there's less backported with activation
12:03 < MarcoFalke> We still have 14 days to find and fix all bugs
12:04 < luke-jr> but I'll save that for the dedicated topic
12:04 < wumpus> luke-jr: well 10-15 is today here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18947 , but does it matter, everything tagged as feature was merged
12:04 < wumpus> (except for the GUI one apparently, if it's ready for merge it should go in)
12:04 < luke-jr> wumpus: doesn't mean much when only a few people can edit tags :/
12:05 < wumpus> luke-jr: the idea is that things get proposed for the milestone in meetings, or in the channel at least
12:05 < dongcarl> hi
12:05 < luke-jr> oh well, BIP 8 isn't strictly feature anyway
12:05 < fjahr_> hi
12:06 < wumpus> #topic Pending bugfixes for 0.21
12:06 < wumpus> any bugfixes that we should get in for the release missing on the milestone?
12:07 < jonatack> i'd propose 20120, 20115, 19961, and maybe 19874
12:07 < luke-jr> I found #20157,  not sure how important it is
12:07 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20157 | Bugfix: chainparams: Add missing (disabled) Taproot deployment for Signet by luke-jr · Pull Request #20157 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:07 < sipa> luke-jr: should definitely be fixed before release
12:07 < sipa> #20120
12:07 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20120 | net, rpc, test, bugfix: update GetNetworkName, GetNetworksInfo, regression tests by jonatack · Pull Request #20120 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:07 < luke-jr> > #20120, #20115, #19961, and maybe #19874
12:07 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20120 | net, rpc, test, bugfix: update GetNetworkName, GetNetworksInfo, regression tests by jonatack · Pull Request #20120 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:07 < jonatack> plus the upcoming fix for #19543
12:07 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20115 | cli: -netinfo quick updates/fixups and release note by jonatack · Pull Request #20115 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:07 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19961 | doc: tor.md updates by jonatack · Pull Request #19961 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:07 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19874 | cli, bugfix: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers by jonatack · Pull Request #19874 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:07 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19543 | Normalize fee units for RPC ("BTC/kB" and "sat/B) · Issue #19543 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:08 < hebasto> #20080 or #19933
12:08 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20080 | Strip any trailing `/` in -datadir path by hebasto · Pull Request #20080 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:08 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19933 | wallet: bugfix; if datadir has a trailing / listwalletdir would strip lead char of walletname by Saibato · Pull Request #19933 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:08 < luke-jr> oh yes, one of those are important to get in ☺
12:08 < wumpus> jonatack: i'm not convinced  #19874 is really a bugfix
12:08 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19874 | cli, bugfix: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers by jonatack · Pull Request #19874 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:09 < luke-jr> afaik -getinfo has never worked with old servers gracefully
12:09 < ariard> hi
12:09 < jonatack> agree that it's optional. the doc/tor.md is still in draft but will open v soon
12:09 < sipa> i think documentation improvements can be done after feature freeze
12:09 < MarcoFalke> tests and docs can go in any time
12:10 < jonatack> sipa: agree, i held off on those to get the features in
12:11 < provoostenator> #18788 would be good tests to add
12:11 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18788 | tests: Update more tests to work with descriptor wallets by achow101 · Pull Request #18788 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:11 < wumpus> 19543 was already tagged
12:12 < luke-jr> oh, did achow101 want to make descriptor wallets tied to sqlite? where does that stand?
12:12 < luke-jr> #20156 is IMO a bugfix
12:12 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20156 | Make sqlite support optional (compile-time) by luke-jr · Pull Request #20156 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:12 < provoostenator> luke-jr: that's already merged
12:12 < wumpus> yes, that was his plan, to make it clearer that those are two different wallet formats
12:12 < meshcollider> Please can we decide which of 19933 and 20080 we want to keep and which one to close?
12:13 < luke-jr> provoostenator: tying the two together is?
12:13 < wumpus> luke-jr: i think 'return a null in a field' is graceful enough, it just shouldn't crash
12:13 < MarcoFalke> I like #20080 
12:13 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20080 | Strip any trailing `/` in -datadir path by hebasto · Pull Request #20080 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:13 < provoostenator> luke-jr: descriptor == sqlite for new wallet yes
12:13 < provoostenator> see my comment as well
12:13 < promag> +1 #20080
12:13 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20080 | Strip any trailing `/` in -datadir path by hebasto · Pull Request #20080 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:13 < provoostenator> Unless achow101 changed his mind about that, but I think that was the point of getting it in before release
12:13 < wumpus> 20080 was already tagged right
12:13 < MarcoFalke> I promise to test 20080 soon
12:13 < wumpus> please don't repeat things
12:13 < luke-jr> wumpus: 'return a null in a field' ?
12:14 < wumpus> I'm having a lot of trouble keeping track of PRs mentioned here to add them to the milestone
12:14 < luke-jr> oh, for -getinfo; sure; or just an error even
12:14 < wumpus> luke-jr: yes
12:14 < meshcollider> Alright 20080 it is, I'll close 19933
12:15 < wumpus> meshcollider: yes makes sense
12:16 < wumpus> I think I've tagged everything mentioned, if not, please let me know
12:16 < promag> wumpus: maybe #20125
12:16 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20125 | rpc, wallet: Expose database format in getwalletinfo by promag · Pull Request #20125 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:17 < luke-jr> 20080 should get 0.19.x and 0.20.x tags too I think
12:17 < wumpus> promag: sounds like a feature to me
12:17 < MarcoFalke> luke-jr: It already has
12:17 < wumpus> (though maybe a necessary one, I don't' know)
12:17 < luke-jr> o
12:17 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:17 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider closed pull request #19933: wallet: bugfix; if datadir has a trailing '/'  listwalletdir would strip lead char of walletname (master...wallet-fix-missing-chars-boost-1.47) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19933
12:18 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
12:18 < jonatack> agree with promag about 20125
12:18 < wumpus> luke-jr: let's discuss the 0.21 milestone now not other ones
12:18 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:19 < wumpus> ok adding 20125...
12:19 < promag> wumpus: not really... just adds "format" key to the rpc response
12:19 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:19 < wumpus> well it's not a bugfix at least
12:19 < wumpus> but I don't care it seems minimal enough
12:19 < promag> wumpus: right
12:20 < wumpus> that concludes the topic I guess
12:20 < luke-jr> I'm not sure it makes sense to expose that detail, but meh
12:21 < wumpus> #topic taproot relay policy / activation on testnet/signet (sipa)
12:21 < sipa> hi
12:21 < wumpus> luke-jr: especially if it's linked to descriptor wallets it seems a bit redundant, but yeah...
12:21 < promag> luke-jr: could still be rejected ;)
12:21 < sipa> there are a few aspects here
12:21 < wumpus> if it's useful for troubleshooting/diagnosis it should be in
12:22 < sipa> one is relay of v1 transaction outputs; bitcoin core will do that since #15846
12:22 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15846 | [POLICY] Make sending to future native witness outputs standard by sipa · Pull Request #15846 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:22 < sipa> but since the merge of #19953, we'll also relay spends of (valid) taproot outputs
12:22 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19953 | Implement BIP 340-342 validation (Schnorr/taproot/tapscript) by sipa · Pull Request #19953 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:23 < sipa> i think that's undesirable, at least until activation is defined, or even until actually activated
12:23  * luke-jr did suggest splitting that out of the PR a few months ago :P
12:24 < sipa> luke-jr: well, we do want it on regtest
12:24 < luke-jr> regtest supports acceptnonstdtxn, but ok
12:26 < sipa> talking to sdaftuar a bit, i think we should just reject creation and spending of v1 outputs until taproot is _active_
12:26 < sipa> as a policy rule (not through script validation, which is more invasive)
12:27 < sipa> or at least creation as soon as an activation is defined
12:27 < sipa> (so that the behavior on mainnet before an activation is defined is essentially as if it didn't exist at all)
12:28 < sipa> i can open a PR/issue and discuss further there
12:28 < sipa> but i wanted to bring this up, as it may be unexpected that master is now doing taproot validation on the mempool
12:28 < wumpus> I think that makes sense, to do that as a policy rule
12:28 < MarcoFalke> so the spends would be valid taproot spends (with witness) only?
12:29 < sipa> so right now: all v1 creation is relayed, v1 spends are relayed only if valid according to taproot rules
12:29 < ariard> is there any disadvantage of doing this?
12:30 < sipa> my proposal: v1 creation is not relayed while taproot activation is defined but not yet active; v1 spending is only relayed after being actually active
12:30 -!- ossifrage [~ossifrage@unaffiliated/ossifrage] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:30 < provoostenator> Why not always relay?
12:31 < MarcoFalke> provoostenator: Someone will give away their coins, surely
12:31 < provoostenator> Doesn't seem ideal to have a bunch of nodes out there not relaying v1 transactions. 
12:31 < sipa> provoostenator: they'd all start relaying as soon as activation happens
12:31 < sipa> before that point, we don't care
12:31 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
12:32 < ariard> sipa: so you want to hardcode the loosening policy change based on the consensus activation IIRC ?
12:32 < luke-jr> well, activation isn't in 0.21.0, so not these
12:32 < sipa> luke-jr: indeed, the only effect on 0.21.0 would be making spending of v1 non relayed
12:32 < jnewbery> sipa: what's the difference between 'not relayed while taproot activation is defined but not yet active' and 'only relayed after being actually active'
12:33 < provoostenator> Did we relay v1 to/from transactions before taproot was merged?
12:33 < sipa> jnewbery: creation would be relayed as long as no activation parameters are set (the idea being that without activation parameters, it should be treated as an unknown future upgrade that can still change)
12:33 < aj> jnewbery: 0.21.0 will be not-defined and not-active, so will always relay creation of taproot outputs, but not spends of them
12:34 < sipa> maybe this is a simpler principle: before activation is _defined_, behavior should be identical to before taproot was merged
12:34 < aj> sipa: i'm not sure it makes much sense to make it harder to spend a taproot output than to create one? creating one before activation is how you lose money?
12:34 < jeremyrubin> aj: i thought we checked outputs standardness?
12:35 < jnewbery> sipa aj: thanks
12:35 < aj> jeremyrubin: 15846
12:35 < luke-jr> aj: the spend we make harder, may be a theft
12:35 < luke-jr> you can't steal if you can't spend
12:35 < jeremyrubin> #15846
12:35 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15846 | [POLICY] Make sending to future native witness outputs standard by sipa · Pull Request #15846 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:35 < aj> luke-jr: prior to activation miners can spend trivially
12:35 < luke-jr> aj: miners don't rely on others' policy
12:36 < sipa> aj: my suggestion is that relay of creation and spending only differs before activation is defined... to match pre-taproot-implemented behavior
12:36 < sipa> after activation is defined, both are disallowed until it is actually active
12:36 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@mail.dargis.net] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
12:37 < luke-jr> (OT: wumpus: #19502 should probably get milestoned)
12:37 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19502 | Bugfix: Wallet: Soft-fail exceptions within ListWalletDir file checks by luke-jr · Pull Request #19502 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:37 < sipa> aj: which is ultimately due to softfork safeness... if we treat taproot as subject to change still (which i think we should until activation is defined), we shouldn't permit spending it to be relayed
12:38 < wumpus> luke-jr: ok
12:38 < jeremyrubin> has that been reverted though somehow?
12:38 < sipa> jeremyrubin: what?
12:38 < jeremyrubin> looking at the current code and I'm not seeing that logic still
12:38 < aj> sipa: right, immediately after activation (supported by 0.21.1 say), you have all nodes relaying creation, but only 0.21.1 nodes relaying spends. vs having 0.21.0 and 0.21.1 nodes validating and relaying spends if we leave things as they are now
12:39 < jeremyrubin> Ah
12:39 < jeremyrubin> it went into Solver
12:39 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:40 < sipa> aj: i think permitting spends right now is bad... it's just gratuitous policy difference between 0.21 and pre-0.21 nodes
12:40 < sipa> the extra rule for suspending relay of outputs is user protection before activation
12:41 < sipa> anyway, will open an issue
12:41 < aj> sipa: the principle (no behaviour change prior to activation) makes sense, just doesn't seem like it has much benefit (people still lose money if they create outputs earlier, because miners will claim them via a non-std tx) and slight costs (will make relay slightly harder due to implementation-but-no-activation nodes not relaying)
12:41 < wumpus> 20 minutes left, we might want to move to the next topic
12:41 < sipa> aj: if their own node rejects relay, miners will never see the tx :)
12:41 < luke-jr> sipa: no reason their own node would :P
12:41 < wumpus> #topic  Getting BIP 8 logic in before freeze (luke-jr)
12:42 < luke-jr> I've implemented the current BIP 8 as logic only (no activations) in #19573. This is probably not the final BIP 8 (aj's been working on some revisions), but having it merged in 0.21 means we can have a smaller diff to add Taproot activation later.
12:42 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19573 | Replace unused BIP 9 logic with draft BIP 8 by luke-jr · Pull Request #19573 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:42 < luke-jr> Would be nice to get this merged before 0.21.0rc1 if possible. Anyone who wants to help review (or other) can join ##taproot-activation to help get this done quickly.
12:42 < luke-jr> Note the PR depends on #19401 and #20157. These are fairly trivial, and the former already has 2 ACKs.
12:42 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19401 | QA: Use GBT to get block versions correct by luke-jr · Pull Request #19401 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:42 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20157 | Bugfix: chainparams: Add missing (disabled) Taproot deployment for Signet by luke-jr · Pull Request #20157 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:43 -!- rafaelpac [bfb09340@191.176.147.64] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:45 < wumpus> i don't know, it does feel a bit rushed to me, to merge something (that should be a no-op otherwise) last minute just to minimize the diff later, especially when we don't even know yet if it's the final state of the BIP
12:45 < wumpus> not a small project either
12:45 < luke-jr> hmm, true
12:46 < sipa> no strong opinion... it doesn't seem very invasive, but on the other hand, this can also easily be backported along with actual activation parameters
12:46 < sipa> it also may turn out to be wasted effort
12:46 -!- ossifrage [~ossifrage@unaffiliated/ossifrage] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:47 < luke-jr> not sure how it could be wasted effort
12:47 < luke-jr> sipa: your topic, you had mentioned signet/testnet activation - that might or might not be a reason to do this sooner
12:47 < jeremyrubin> i think it makes sense to wait for cleaner git history
12:48 < luke-jr> jeremyrubin: I'm assuming the two trivial PRs would be merged first as part of this process
12:48 < sipa> oh right, i didn't bring that up... do we want to define an activation on testnet?
12:48 < sipa> that's something that was done historically, but with signet i think there may be less need now
12:48 < luke-jr> I think it makes sense to test BIP 8 with testnet
12:49 < wumpus> it should activate there at some time i guess
12:50 < sipa> always possible in .1 or whatever point release too, of course
12:50 < aj> probably shouldn't activate on testnet with a different activation method than we plan on using for mainnet?
12:50 < luke-jr> sipa: true
12:50 -!- rafaelpac [bfb09340@191.176.147.64] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:51 < luke-jr> maybe that's a good solution: testnet in .1, and mainnet not until .2
12:51 < sipa> it'd be nice to see things active on signet first before suggesting testnet changes
12:51 < wumpus> sipa: right
12:51 < aj> kallewoof's not awake, but i was thinking maybe lock taproot as it stands in immediately on the default signet, and if worst comes to worst just restart the signet chain if needed
12:51 < sipa> (as in signet it can be rolled out without code changes...)
12:51 < wumpus> that's great
12:52 < luke-jr> signet doesn't even need an activation, does it?
12:52 < luke-jr> just always-active?
12:52 < MarcoFalke> wait, if spends are made non-standard, it needs conde changes for signet
12:52 < aj> sipa: (not-relaying taproot-txs if activation hasn't happened will affect the "without code changes" part a bit
12:52 < aj> luke-jr: yeah, that's what i'm thinking
12:52 < aj> luke-jr: (i mean, "always-active" is an activation)
12:53 < luke-jr> the policy changes sipa suggested are conditional on the deployment state AFAIK?
12:53 < MarcoFalke> so I guess s/without/minimal/
12:53 < aj> luke-jr: right, but *nodes* have to know the deployment state in that case, not just miners
12:53 < luke-jr> so always-active would trigger the spending policy
12:53 < sipa> i think we can flesh these things out the next few days
12:53 < aj> yep
12:54 < luke-jr> yeah, let's give jeremyrubin some minutes ☺
12:54 < jeremyrubin> i need like 1 min
12:54 < jeremyrubin> so no rush
12:54 < wumpus> #topic Small announcement on behalf of BGIN (jeremyrubin)
12:54 < jeremyrubin> Matsuo has asked me to share the following
12:55 < jeremyrubin> FYI bgin-global.org is hosting an event for core devs the first week of Nov, please fill out this form https://forms.gle/99yUnQdtAkAwt5SW7 to assist scheduling or email schwentker@bsafe.network with any questions. Goal of the event is to help core dev sustainability, so should be of interest for all here.
12:55 < jeremyrubin> https://bgin-global.org
12:55 < luke-jr> during a pandemic? O.o
12:55 < achow101> Who's bgin?
12:55 < jeremyrubin> it's a virtual event
12:55 < luke-jr> i c
12:55 < luke-jr> "Blockchain Governance Initiative Network "
12:55 < jeremyrubin> BGIN is "Blockchain Governance Initiative Network (BGIN)"
12:56 < jeremyrubin> I'd ignore the acronym tho
12:56 < luke-jr> so this is like NY agreement in organization form? :x
12:56 < jeremyrubin> no
12:56 < aj> there's also coinbase looking to support bitcoin dev projects as of an hour or so ago https://twitter.com/coinbase/status/1316801517983334401 
12:56 < jeremyrubin> it's the sort of name that you have to have to get intl participation from people in intl financial regulation
12:56 < luke-jr> jeremyrubin: lol
12:56 < jeremyrubin> so it's started by Matsuo and others
12:57 < jeremyrubin> the point being that a lot of various regulators want to chat about how Bitcoin works and how they engage, but also understanding how standards emerge 
12:57 < jeremyrubin> But a part of that is they want to understand and potentiall support development through research grants
12:58 < wumpus> that sounds pretty scary tbh
12:58 < jeremyrubin> so it's maybe folk you'd rather not talk to at all depending on your preferences, but it is a good faith effort afaict 
12:58 < jeremyrubin> :shrug:
12:59 < jeremyrubin> I'd encourage you to email concerns to schwentker@bsafe.network
13:00 < luke-jr> jeremyrubin: it sounds like they're just giving webinars and we'd simply watch it? O.o
13:00 < jeremyrubin> no i don't think so
13:00 < jeremyrubin> I think they want to hear from you directly
13:00 < MarcoFalke> end meeting?
13:00 < wumpus> ok, I think everything is said, thanks for the announcement
13:00 < wumpus> #endmeeting
13:00 < lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Oct 15 20:00:46 2020 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
13:00 < lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-15-19.00.html
13:00 < lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-15-19.00.txt
13:00 < lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-15-19.00.log.html
13:00 < luke-jr> >how they engage
13:00 < luke-jr> "don't
13:01 < luke-jr> jk, maybe should tell them to get rid of the travel rule tho ;)
13:01 < jeremyrubin> I mean, there are practical things that are relatively improtant to engage them on
13:01 < jeremyrubin> E.g., travel rule
13:01 < luke-jr> jeremyrubin: yeah, joking
13:01 < jeremyrubin> do you owe taxes on BCash
13:01 < luke-jr> not anymore
13:01 < emzy> jeremyrubin: I also find it strange. But can I as a none dev also join?
13:02 < jeremyrubin> If you had a contract denom in Bitcoin do you owe BCash and Bitcoin after a fork?
13:02 < luke-jr> emzy: who is to say you're not a dev? ;)
13:02 < achow101> luke-jr: re: sqlite and descriptors. The intention for the foreseeable future is sqlite == descriptors and descriptors == sqlite. So adjust #20156 accordingly
13:02 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20156 | Make sqlite support optional (compile-time) by luke-jr · Pull Request #20156 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
13:02 < emzy> luke-jr: me :)
13:02 < luke-jr> achow101: what needs adjustment?
13:02 < sipa> achow101: no way to convert legacy bdb wallets to legacy sqlite ones?
13:03 < jeremyrubin> Anyways, i don't think there is malintnet but up to you to give benefit of the doubt or express concerns to them directly 
13:03 < jeremyrubin> i am a mere herald 
13:03 < aj> "legacy sqlite" wow, already :)
13:03 < luke-jr> wumpus: 20156 missed milestoning
13:03 < luke-jr> aj: lol
13:03 < sipa> aj: legacy meaning non-descriptor
13:03 < jeremyrubin> emzy: I think you'd be fine to join, just fill out the form
13:03 < achow101> luke-jr: to enforce that descriptor wallets can't be made of sqlite is disabled. Dunno of you already did that, still going through my email backlog
13:03 < aj> sipa: yeah :)
13:04 < emzy> jeremyrubin: I did. At least I can tell you here what happend :)
13:04 < luke-jr> achow101: I didn't remove any code enforcing it, at least
13:04 < achow101> sipa: maybe dump them createfromdump, but I'm not intending on making a migration for it
13:04 < jeremyrubin> emzy: wat?
13:05 < emzy> jeremyrubin: I submitted the form.
13:05 < sipa> achow101: well the question is if the format should be supported i think, regardless of how someone can create it
13:06 < luke-jr> error = Untranslated(strprintf("Failed to load database path '%s'. Data is not in required format.", path.string()));
13:06 < luke-jr> I guess that error could be clearer
13:06 < luke-jr> or maybe just remove descriptor support entirely
13:06 < sipa> it's ok to say non-descriptor-sqlite wallets are unsupported
13:06 < jonatack> achow101: right, the main reason for adding a db format field to getwalletinfo or -getinfo is because a bdb wallet can be descriptor 
13:06 < sipa> if we don't test that
13:06 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
13:06 < sipa> but whatever combinations are supported should be tested
13:07 < wumpus> i'm all for not supporting too many combinations
13:07 < sipa> and those that aren't should at least get a warning
13:07 < wumpus> be careful here, anything you support for the wallet needs to be support for pretty much near forever
13:07 < sipa> (or otherwise be impossible to create)
13:07 < achow101> luke-jr: I'll have a look when I get home, but I was intending on writing a full without-bdb and without-sqlite thing that disabled legacy or descriptors respectively
13:07 < wumpus> as those files will be around for a long time
13:07 < wumpus> it's also confusing for users
13:07 < wumpus> two types of wallet is enough, avoid the combinatorial cmplexity
13:08 < sipa> yeah
13:09 < sipa> that's fair
13:09 < achow101> jonatack: I think that's useful for experts who do unsupported things, but for most users, the format should be tied to the type
13:09 < jeremyrubin> 2**256 wallets for added security
13:10 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:10 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dongcarl closed pull request #20050: validation: Prune (in)direct g_chainman usage related to ::LookupBlockIndex (bundle 1) (master...2020-09-libbitcoinruntime-v4) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20050
13:10 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
13:12 < wumpus> heh
13:12 < achow101> sipa: I think it will be supported but not recommended, aka you had to jump through a lot of hoops to get to legacy sqlite
13:13 < sipa> yeah, ok
13:13 < luke-jr> i can use sqlite wit uncompressed pubkeys?
13:13 < luke-jr> :P
13:13 < achow101> sure
13:14 < achow101> Descriptora can have uncompressed keys
13:14 < luke-jr> :o
13:14 < luke-jr> I meant the old wallet format tho
13:14 < luke-jr> we should probably drop support for that.. it isn't actually compatible post-segwit anyway :x
13:15 -!- filchef [~filchef@212.104.97.177] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:15 < sipa> you mean sqlite non-descriptor with uncompressed keys?
13:15 < achow101> Yeah but you and Matt will complain about it
13:15 -!- filchef [~filchef@212.104.97.177] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:15 < luke-jr> lol
13:16 < luke-jr> Qt should stop using camelcase so I don't need to guess at if they did ToolTip or Tooltip
13:17 < achow101> Is actually toolTip
13:17 < luke-jr> )(%#&)#_)#
13:17 < luke-jr> (I'm actually calling SetToolTip, so it's okay)
13:20 < promag> descriptors:true wallet doesn't mean it's sqlite right?
13:20 < promag> only true starting with 0.21, at least that's my understanding
13:21 < achow101> yes
13:21 < promag> that's why I'm suggesting "format" in getwalletinfo response
13:22 < promag> nit, and maybe in the gui we could have some thing/icon/whatever for these things - like getwalletinfo
13:22 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:23 < luke-jr> promag: descriptors:true will mean sqlite in all supported configurations AIUI
13:24 < promag> luke-jr: you can still open a 0.20 descriptors wallet?
13:25 < luke-jr> promag: 0.20 doesn't support descriptors
13:25 < luke-jr> I don't think..
13:25 < promag> <.<
13:28 < promag> luke-jr: you are right
13:28 < promag> #16528
13:28 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16528 | Native Descriptor Wallets using DescriptorScriptPubKeyMan by achow101 · Pull Request #16528 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
13:30 < promag> 0.20 has some descriptors stuff, but not the option to create descriptors wallet
13:30 -!- ossifrage [~ossifrage@unaffiliated/ossifrage] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:34 -!- vincenzopalazzo [~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:9867:273:d21b:c6c] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:35 < achow101> Irs only helpful for people who have descriptor wallets on old master
13:36 < promag> right
13:37  * luke-jr likes git-worktree
13:37 < promag> on the long run the plan is to enforce descriptors?
13:37 < promag> and as a consequence it will be sqlite?
13:38 < achow101> Yes
13:38 < promag> or we will also support non descriptor wallets in sqlite?
13:39 < achow101> It will be supported as in if you somehow make one, we won't explode
13:39 < luke-jr> will we explode on promag's bdb descriptor wallet? ;)
13:40 < achow101> But actually making one is going to be non trivial
13:40 < achow101> Same for bdb descriptor wallets
13:41 < achow101> luke-jr: I've been running the sqlite branch with 3 of the 4 combinations of format and type without any issue
13:41 < achow101> For the past 3 months or so
13:42 < promag> "non trivial" why?
13:42 < achow101> Only one I haven't run is legacy sqlite
13:42 -!- lightlike [~lightlike@p200300c7ef18aa0064f9e41f2f81eec6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
13:43 < achow101> promag: to avoid combinatorial complexity in the migration code
13:45 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:46 < achow101> I'll open an issue that lays out the full plan and a timeline
13:52 < aj> luke-jr: git-worktree is the best. shame paths end up hardcoded so ccache stuff isn't shared across them though
13:53 < luke-jr> aj: wait, what? ccache doesn't care about paths, does it?
13:53 < sipa> your ccache cache is shared i think?
13:54 < sipa> it's in $HOME/.ccache
13:55 < luke-jr> hmm, I thought I configured my ccache to be on tmpfs tho
13:55 < luke-jr> ah yes cache directory                     /var/tmp/ccache-dev
13:55 < sipa> ah, or wherever you configure it to be
13:57 -!- promag [~promag@dsl-5-27.bl27.telepac.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:58 -!- promag [~promag@dsl-5-27.bl27.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:00 -!- Lthere [~Lthere@185.204.1.185] has quit []
14:00 < aj> luke-jr: ccache doesn't directly, but the path ends up going into the preprocessed source somewhere or something which makes ccache's input different each time... not sure how though now that i look
14:00 -!- wilcl_ark is now known as willcl_ark
14:03 -!- promag [~promag@dsl-5-27.bl27.telepac.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
14:05 < aj> oh, i'm wrong, ccache has a `hash_dir` flag that makes it hash the working dir, and it's -g that puts the working dir in the .o files
14:06 < sipa> still, worktrees are very useful
14:06 < sipa> i have separate ones for fuzzer builds (so i don't need to re-run ./configure with the fuzzer flags all the time)
14:06 < sipa> and sanitizer builds
14:07 < sipa> you can't checkout the same branch in two worktrees simultaneously, but you can use git checkout --detach in one to just switch to code of a branch in another
14:10 < luke-jr> aj: it being in the .o should be okay?
14:10 < luke-jr> sipa: you can checkout the same branch if you really want to :D
14:10 < sipa> luke-jr: how so?
14:11 < sipa> is there some --use-the-force option?
14:11 < luke-jr> IIRC
14:12 < luke-jr> --force
14:12 -!- Guyver2 [Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
14:15 -!- vincenzopalazzo [~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:9867:273:d21b:c6c] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
14:16 -!- filchef [~filchef@212.104.97.177] has quit [Quit: KVIrc 5.0.0 Aria http://www.kvirc.net/]
14:22 -!- Antimatter [~Antimatte@84.39.116.180] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:29 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:32 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:38 -!- Exho [~Echoplex@139.180.171.37] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.9.1]
14:39 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex]
14:40 -!- rabidus [~rabidus@85.76.51.88] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:43 < sipa> if anyone gets this warning with gcc 9, it's a compiler bug (which just produces a bogus warning):
14:43 < sipa> src/ecmult_impl.h:496:48: warning: array subscript [1, 268435456] is outside array bounds of ‘struct secp256k1_strauss_point_state[1]’ [-Warray-bounds] 496 |             secp256k1_gej tmp = a[state->ps[np].input_pos];
14:59 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:59 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theStack opened pull request #20159: test: mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py improvements (use MiniWallet, add logging) (master...20201015-test-improve-mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20159
14:59 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
14:59 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
15:04 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:10 < luke-jr> btw, why do we use "org.bitcoinfoundation.Bitcoin-Qt" on macOS?
15:11 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
15:12 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:14 < jb55> awkward
15:14 < phantomcircuit> luke-jr, iirc wasn't gavin the one signing the macos builds?
15:14 < phantomcircuit> probably just legacy from that
15:15 < sipa> i think changing it was brought up before, but would break compatibility with existing settings so wasn't done?
15:16 < sipa> (it's awkward that it was ever set to that - even when the foundation was actively sponsoring developers - but little that can be done about that now)
15:16 < luke-jr> sipa: it doesn't look like it would from the context :/
15:19 < sipa> there is some discussion about it in #17462
15:19 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17462 | build: macOS fix Info.plist by RandyMcMillan · Pull Request #17462 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
15:22 -!- promag_ is now known as promag
15:24 < promag> achow101: is there anything preventing swaping CWallet::database in runtime? so 1) load with bdb 2) swap database 3) write all ?
15:24 < promag> *swap to sqlite
15:24 < achow101> promag: you might end up missing a few records
15:24 < achow101> I'd definitely wouldn't recommend doing that
15:24 < promag> not all records are loaded ok
15:25 < achow101> promag: all records are loaded, it's just a matter of making sure that "write all" wrote them all
15:25 < achow101> there's no existing "write all"
15:25 < promag> oh ok
15:26 < luke-jr> all records might not be loaded
15:26 < luke-jr> IIRC moves don't
15:26 < achow101> there are some records that aren't loaded because they aren't useful, just kept around for back compat. obviously back compat doesn't matter if you move to sqlite
15:26 < phantomcircuit> sipa, iirc the foundation was paying for the certificate, something about it being easier for a "foundation" to get one than for an individual
15:26 < luke-jr> achow101: uh, pretty sure we still show them
15:27 < phantomcircuit> who knows if that was true or if it was pretextual though..
15:27 < achow101> luke-jr: no? I mean things like "default key" or the original "version"
15:27 < achow101> (version is now "minversion")
15:28 < promag> don't see a reason to remove load-bdb, that way the user could just send the funds to new wallet and we wouldn't have to do the migration tool
15:28 < achow101> The surefire way to migrate format is to grab a cursor on the original db, iterate it, and write every key/value pair in the new db
15:29 < luke-jr> achow101: well, I don't think moves get loaded either
15:29 < achow101> luke-jr: moves as in the old move rpc?
15:29 < luke-jr> yes
15:30 < achow101> I thought those records just got renamed and redefined for labels
15:30 < luke-jr> what?
15:30 < promag> bdb2sqlite.py incoming
15:30 < achow101> but also, that's for back compat, and if you are going to sqlite, back compat doesn't matter
15:30 < luke-jr> achow101: I would be annoyed if migrating my wallet lost data
15:31 < luke-jr> {"account": "a", "category": "move", "time": 1296345052, "amount": 0.00100000, "otheraccount": "b", "comment": ""},
15:31 < luke-jr> this shouldn't disappear from listtransactions just because I upgrade
15:31 < achow101> luke-jr: right, which is also why I prefer the straight record-to-record migration rather than what is loaded in CWallet
15:39 -!- Livestradamus [~quassel@unaffiliated/livestradamus] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:39 -!- IPGlider [~IPGlider@45.76.34.219] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:40 -!- Livestradamus [~quassel@unaffiliated/livestradamus] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:41 -!- IPGlider [~IPGlider@45.76.34.219] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:47 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:47 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #20161: Minor Taproot follow-ups (master...202010_taproot_followup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20161
15:47 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
16:00 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit []
16:18 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:35 -!- snex [~snex@104.238.46.33] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:35 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:35 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #20162: p2p, compiler warnings: specify Announcement::m_state bitfield to be 8 bits (master...bitfield-too-small-warning) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20162
16:35 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
16:35 -!- snex [~snex@104.238.46.33] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
16:36 < fanquake> Yea I’m fairly certain we can’t change that MacOS string without breaking something
16:40 -!- fjahr_ is now known as fjahr
16:46 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@c-73-34-43-4.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
16:47 -!- _joerodgers [~joerodger@c-76-125-83-191.hsd1.ar.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:49 -!- _joerodgers [~joerodger@c-76-125-83-191.hsd1.ar.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
16:52 -!- joerodgers [~joerodger@141.98.255.150] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
17:00 -!- Antimatter [~Antimatte@84.39.116.180] has quit []
17:00 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:05 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:08 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
17:09 -!- sailor [~Sailor@196.235.102.148] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:11 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:11 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:15 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-139-5.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
17:18 -!- sailor [~Sailor@196.235.102.148] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
17:22 -!- I440r [~I440r@195.206.169.184] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:24 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@174-29-30-112.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:39 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:39 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:52 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:52 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:58 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
18:00 -!- sipa [~pw@gateway/tor-sasl/sipa1024] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
18:07 -!- sipa [~pw@gateway/tor-sasl/sipa1024] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:24 -!- sipa [~pw@gateway/tor-sasl/sipa1024] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
18:24 -!- sipa [~pw@gateway/tor-sasl/sipa1024] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:30 -!- glozow [uid453516@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-gxlwpojdyoxusxnv] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
18:35 < aj> sipa: hmm, wouldn't it be better to have AreInputsStandard() return false for taproot spends prior to taproot actually activating? could pass down currentBlockScriptVerifyFlags to do that, I think?
18:39 < sipa> aj: there is no script validation flag that will reject a valid taproot spend
18:40 < sipa> one could be added, but that's a bit invasive... i'd rather do it through policy/policy.cpp alone
18:41 < sipa> aj: and yes, i suggest that (a) before activation is defined: creation is allowed, spending is not (b) while defined but unactivated: neither is allowed (c) when active, both are allowed
18:41 < sipa> an alternative - if we don't care about the theft protection - is making (b) identical to (a)
18:42 < aj> sipa: oh... maybe it was too early in the morning when i read what you were saying then, that sounds great
18:42 < sipa> and looking at implementation... (a) can easily be extended to "any situation in which it will never activate", including when it has failed
18:44 < sipa> one downside to have (a) and (b) have different behavior is that it introduces a trivial relay policy difference between nodes-with-activation and nodes-without-activation
18:44 < sipa> so if that's a concern, it should just be: whenever not active: creating allowed, spending not
18:45 < aj> there'll be a relay policy difference between (a) and (c) and (b)/(c) are the same nodes, so that seems fine?
18:45 < sipa> right, but we can expect that by the time activation happens, many nodes will have activation included
18:46 < sipa> so it's a synchronized event rather than dependent on upgrade time
18:48 < fanquake> Is anyone else seeing a number of the functional tests fail? https://gist.github.com/fanquake/f3df509a6f810a104b97a38753ef7a5a 
18:48 < fanquake> Wondering if I've got some local issue
18:48 < aj> maybe make (b) while defined and in LOCKED_IN neither is allowed, would make it mostly safe and synchronised?
18:49 -!- promag_ [~promag@176.79.5.27] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:50 < sipa> hmm, just have the theft protection while locked in and not yet activated?
18:50 < aj> sipa: yeah. so people spending to taproot a little early are protected
18:51 < aj> a little protected anyway
18:51 -!- promag [~promag@176.79.5.27] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
18:58 -!- Eagle[TM] [~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:59 -!- EagleTM [~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
19:17 -!- afk11` [~afk11@gateway/tor-sasl/afk11] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
19:18 -!- afk11` [~afk11@gateway/tor-sasl/afk11] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:00 -!- I440r [~I440r@195.206.169.184] has quit []
20:26 < fanquake> Seems there is at least some unwanted interaction between #20080 and the functional tests. Unclear why Travis / tests don't seem to be failing for anyone else: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20080#issuecomment-709708344
20:26 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20080 | Strip any trailing `/` in -datadir path by hebasto · Pull Request #20080 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
20:32 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
20:34 < kallewoof> promag_: I made https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13746 a few years ago. Closed it due to lack of interest, though, but it seems similar to what you're saying.
20:35 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:36 < sipa> #13746
20:36 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13746 | -masterdatadir for datadir bootstrapping by kallewoof · Pull Request #13746 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
20:37 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@174-29-30-112.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
20:38 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:38 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] riyasingh0799 opened pull request #20164: [test] undo truncation of digits in btc amount (master...rpc-testmempoolaccept-fee) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20164
20:38 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
20:39 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:57 -!- Ahmuck1 [~Ahmuck@195.206.169.184] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:06 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:06 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9ad7cd2887ab...cbb5f3a2d584
21:06 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cccc752 MarcoFalke: rpc: Properly deserialize txs with witness before signing
21:06 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3333077 MarcoFalke: rpc: Adjust witness-tx deserialize error message
21:06 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cbb5f3a fanquake: Merge #19836: rpc: Properly deserialize txs with witness before signing
21:06 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
21:06 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:06 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #19836: rpc: Properly deserialize txs with witness before signing (master...2008-rpcDeserTxsWitness) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19836
21:06 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
21:23 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:23 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #20165: Only relay Taproot spends if next block has it active (master...202010_taproot_policy) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20165
21:23 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
21:25 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:29 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:29 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #20166: [0.20] Backports (0.20...more_020_backports) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20166
21:29 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
21:29 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
21:38 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:38 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #20091: doc: reflect the current status of Tor support. (master...pr-351-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20091
21:38 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
21:38 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:41 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has quit [Client Quit]
21:45 < luke-jr> sipa: hmm, I wonder if, ideally, we would wait 100 blocks after activation to relay them
21:46 < luke-jr> similar to coinbase spends
21:46 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@174-29-30-112.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:51 < sipa> luke-jr: what would that protect against?
21:51 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:51 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #19635: param: add bool parameter -ephemeraltoronion to generate ephemeral tor addreses (master...ephemeral-tor-onion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19635
21:51 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
21:52 < luke-jr> sipa: reorgs invalidating them with a miner theft
21:52 < luke-jr> sipa: downstream of the actual taproot spend
21:52 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:52 < luke-jr> ie, a taproot spend is similar to a coinbase in that it can be claimed by any miner before the activation block
21:53 < aj> luke-jr: provided the pay-to-taproot tx has block height locktime, that's fine though
21:53 < sipa> luke-jr: that argument would apply to creation of outputs, not spending them
21:54 < luke-jr> aj: oh, that's true
21:54 < luke-jr> hmm, might have been interesting to have a consensus rule that taproot spends need a locktime after the activation height/time; probably also not worth the additional effort tho
21:54 < luke-jr> actually, that doesn't work
21:55 < luke-jr> because that rule wouldn't exist before activation either
21:55 < sipa> right
21:55 < luke-jr> hmm… maybe it would anyway? since it'd be an invalid taproot spend normally
21:56 < luke-jr> oh well, could just as well be a "wallets should do this" best practice
21:57 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:57 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #19419: wallet: let Listwalletdir do not iterate through our blocksdata. (master...wallet_351) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19419
21:57 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
22:14 -!- da39a3ee5e6b4b0d [~textual@n11211935170.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:35 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:38 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:50 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@174-29-30-112.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
22:53 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:53 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:56 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:00 -!- Ahmuck1 [~Ahmuck@195.206.169.184] has quit []
23:04 -!- alko89 [~alko89@unaffiliated/alko89] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:05 -!- alko89 [~alko89@unaffiliated/alko89] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:22 -!- Wayno [~Wayno@185.163.110.116] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:28 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #20164: [test] undo truncation of digits in btc amount (master...rpc-testmempoolaccept-fee) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20164
23:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
23:45 -!- jesseposner [~jesse@98.37.146.62] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
23:52 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
23:56 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:56 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:59 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:59 -!- S3RK [~s3rk@47.246.66.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
--- Log closed Fri Oct 16 00:00:48 2020