--- Log opened Thu May 04 00:00:51 2023
00:04 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:04 -!- salvatoshi [~salvatosh@genymobile-2-6-86.fib.nerim.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:09 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
00:10 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:13 -!- aielima [~aielima@user/aielima] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:15 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
00:16 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:16 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:21 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
00:45 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:49 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:51 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: aielima, SpellChecker_, yanmaani1, bitdex, qxs, ghost43, pharonix71
00:51 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
00:52 -!- Netsplit over, joins: ghost43, bitdex, pharonix71, aielima, qxs, SpellChecker_, yanmaani1
00:54 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
01:01 -!- puchka [~puchka@185.203.122.101] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
01:06 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:10 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
01:12 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:16 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
01:20 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
01:28 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:33 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
01:40 -!- puchka [~puchka@185.203.122.12] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:51 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:55 -!- puchka [~puchka@185.203.122.12] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
01:57 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
01:59 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:02 -!- puchka [~puchka@102.161.66.205] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:04 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
02:09 -!- puchka [~puchka@102.161.66.205] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
02:11 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:11 -!- puchka [~puchka@185.203.122.59] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:15 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
02:38 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:43 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
02:50 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:54 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
02:56 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:01 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:24 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:28 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
03:42 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #27570: refactor: Remove need to pass chainparams from BlockManager methods (master...2305-blockman-chain-params-) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27570
03:42 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:46 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:47 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
03:49 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@user/AaronvanW] has quit [Quit: Leaving...]
03:51 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
03:52 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:53 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@user/AaronvanW] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:56 -!- abubakarsadiq [~abubakars@197.210.76.209] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:56 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
03:57 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #27571: ci: Run iwyu on all src files (master...2305-ci-iwyu-) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27571
03:57 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:02 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:02 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
04:11 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:16 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
04:17 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:22 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
04:28 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:33 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
04:36 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [Closing Window]
04:45 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:49 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
05:02 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:11 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
05:11 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:21 -!- Guest46 [~Guest46@bba-2-50-39-43.alshamil.net.ae] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:22 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theStack opened pull request #27572: test: dedup file hashing using `sha256sum_file` helper (master...test-refactor-use_sha256sum_file_helper) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27572
05:27 -!- bitdex [~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
05:27 -!- abubakarsadiq [~abubakars@197.210.76.209] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
05:30 -!- Guest46 [~Guest46@bba-2-50-39-43.alshamil.net.ae] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
05:30 -!- aielima [~aielima@user/aielima] has quit [Quit: Ciao]
05:30 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:35 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
05:39 -!- test_ is now known as _flood
05:56 -!- abubakarsadiq [~abubakars@197.210.53.16] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:57 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #27364: ci: set docker run --ulimit to workaround Valgrind assertion (master...native_fuzz_valgrind_docker_ulimit) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27364
05:57 -!- MrFrancis [~MrFrancis@2001:8a0:fa4c:901:bc04:5de1:60b6:807b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:58 -!- MrFrancis [~MrFrancis@2001:8a0:fa4c:901:bc04:5de1:60b6:807b] has quit [Client Quit]
06:02 < jamesob> MacroFake: thanks. Eventually was able to repro locally by copying the conf flags exactly from the native_tsan ci/ shell script. Apparently just passing "--with-sanitizers=thread" wasn't sufficient to repro
06:21 -!- abubakarsadiq [~abubakars@197.210.53.16] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
06:22 -!- abubakarsadiq [~abubakars@197.210.77.50] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:32 -!- Murch [~murch@user/murch] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- willcl_ark [~willcl-ar@user/willcl-ark/x-8282106] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- dunxen [~dunxen@2001:470:69fc:105::1:fec1] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- kayabanerve[m] [~kayabaner@2001:470:69fc:105::1:278] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- sequences[m] [~sequences@2001:470:69fc:105::2:ffee] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- BlueMatt[m] [~bluemattm@2001:470:69fc:105::1:5092] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- euclid[m] [~euclidhni@2001:470:69fc:105::2b6f] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- Fractal[m]1 [~fractalma@2001:470:69fc:105::3:2fe2] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- bohruz[m] [~bohruzmat@2001:470:69fc:105::1:59a4] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- provoostenator [~provooste@user/provoostenator] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- stratospher[m] [~stratosph@2001:470:69fc:105::2:728e] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- sipa [~sipa@user/sipa] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- denise[m] [~denisewui@2001:470:69fc:105::1:4ab8] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- kakolainen[m] [~kakolaine@2001:470:69fc:105::34f9] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- wpaulino [~wpaulino@user/wpaulino] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:32 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@2001:470:69fc:105::2:690] has quit [Quit: Bridge terminating on SIGTERM]
06:35 -!- Murch [~murch@user/murch] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@2001:470:69fc:105::2:690] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- willcl_ark [~willcl-ar@user/willcl-ark/x-8282106] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- kakolainen[m] [~kakolaine@2001:470:69fc:105::34f9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- denise[m] [~denisewui@2001:470:69fc:105::1:4ab8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- sipa [~sipa@user/sipa] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- stratospher[m] [~stratosph@2001:470:69fc:105::2:728e] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- sequences[m] [~sequences@2001:470:69fc:105::2:ffee] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- kayabanerve[m] [~kayabaner@2001:470:69fc:105::1:278] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- dunxen [~dunxen@2001:470:69fc:105::1:fec1] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- BlueMatt[m] [~bluemattm@2001:470:69fc:105::1:5092] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- Fractal[m] [~fractalma@2001:470:69fc:105::3:2fe2] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- euclid[m] [~euclidhni@2001:470:69fc:105::2b6f] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- provoostenator [~provooste@user/provoostenator] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:39 -!- wpaulino [~wpaulino@user/wpaulino] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:45 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:50 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
06:55 -!- Guest16 [~Guest16@46.166.179.211] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:56 -!- Guest16 [~Guest16@46.166.179.211] has quit [Client Quit]
07:10 -!- abubakar1adiq [~abubakars@197.210.77.96] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:10 -!- abubakarsadiq [~abubakars@197.210.77.50] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:15 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:15 -!- bugs_ [~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:20 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
07:27 -!- abubakar1adiq [~abubakars@197.210.77.96] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:44 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@user/jarthur] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:09 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/aebcd18c654a...30bf70c8b60f
08:09 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master afc2dd5 Sebastian Falbesoner: test: various `converttopsbt` check cleanups in rpc_psbt.py
08:09 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 30bf70c Andrew Chow: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#27325: test: various `converttopsbt` check cleanups ...
08:09 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 merged pull request #27325: test: various `converttopsbt` check cleanups in rpc_psbt.py (master...test_psbt_cleanups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27325
08:11 -!- preimage [~halosghos@user/halosghost] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:17 -!- b_101 [~robert@189.236.59.209] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:38 -!- aielima [~aielima@user/aielima] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:46 -!- flooded [~flooded@146.70.127.243] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:46 -!- salvatoshi [~salvatosh@genymobile-2-6-86.fib.nerim.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
08:46 -!- kevkevin_ [~kevkevin@2601:241:8703:7b30:fdf9:a35f:16d7:9b75] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:49 -!- _flood [~flooded@149.102.226.226] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
09:05 -!- nintendo1889 [uid23646@id-23646.tinside.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:07 -!- brunoerg_ [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:07 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:11 < instagibbs> fyi, github having a sads right now, pushes aren't seemingly working https://www.githubstatus.com/
09:12 -!- bohruz[m] [~bohruzmat@2001:470:69fc:105::1:59a4] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:12 < fanquake> must be time to knock off
09:12 < instagibbs> 🍻
09:18 < preimage> I still don't understand why githubstatus has an indicator for githubstatus… is that just so they always get to have one green checkmark showing (or the page doesn't load at all)?
09:19 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #27573:  ci: Remove CI_EXEC bloat in test/06_script_b.sh  (master...2305-ci-exec-no-) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27573
09:19 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/30bf70c8b60f...6c7ebcc14b79
09:19 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7e3d4f8 ismaelsadeeq: test: add coverage to ensure the first arg of scantxoutset is needed
09:19 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6c7ebcc fanquake: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#27422: test: add coverage to rpc_scantxoutset.py
09:19 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #27422: test: add coverage to rpc_scantxoutset.py (master...2023-04-test-coverage-rpc_scantxoutset) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27422
09:29 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
09:29 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:34 -!- jon_atack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:36 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
09:44 < achow101> michaelfolkson: we (the maintainers) feel that we need a maintainer that understands our interfaces. We felt that ryanofsky was the obvious choice for this role as he has a lot of experience in that area and is a respected reviewer. This is a different situation from last year as we did not feel the need for another maintainer at that time.
09:45 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@mail.dargis.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:56 < jamesob> incidentally, I'm really happy about ryanofsky being nominated for maintainer. I think he is one of the most experienced, kind devs on the project, and frequently provides detailed review and good feedback for a wide variety of changes. He's one of the only qualified reviewers for coins and other "validation" code.
09:57 -!- Guest0 [~Guest0@2804:7f1:e786:9838:6b47:74ae:9bcb:7b7a] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:57 -!- Guest0 [~Guest0@2804:7f1:e786:9838:6b47:74ae:9bcb:7b7a] has quit [Client Quit]
09:58 -!- Guest0 [~Guest0@2804:7f1:e786:9838:6b47:74ae:9bcb:7b7a] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:08 -!- puchka [~puchka@185.203.122.59] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
10:10 -!- puchka [~puchka@185.203.122.61] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:10 -!- sr_gi[m] [~srgimatri@2001:470:69fc:105::1:c14c] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:12 -!- sanket1729_ [~sanket172@ec2-100-24-255-95.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [Leaving]
10:13 -!- ishaanam[m] [~ishaanamm@2001:470:69fc:105::2:4078] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:13 -!- sanket1729_ [~sanket172@ec2-100-24-255-95.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:32 -!- jon_atack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
10:41 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dergoegge opened pull request #27574: doc: Add post branch-off note about fuzz input pruning (master...2023-05-release-qa-prune) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27574
10:45 -!- jon_atack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:49 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #27575: Introduce platform-agnostic `ALWAYS_INLINE` macro (master...230504-inline) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27575
11:12 < sdaftuar> jamesob: do you have a good workflow for testing assumeutxo?  ie if i ran dumptxoutset on an existing node, what's the easiest way to load that in as a snapshot on a fresh node that i want to test?
11:24 -!- jon_atack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.8]
11:25 -!- nintendo1889 [uid23646@id-23646.tinside.irccloud.com] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
11:37 < glozow> Hi y'all, if you haven't already, 30minutes left to fill out the poll for a new irc meeting time https://doodle.com/meeting/participate/id/ax25vR3d
11:41 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:59 -!- abubakarsadiq [~abubakars@102.91.53.60] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:00 < achow101> #startmeeting
12:00 < core-meetingbot> Meeting started Thu May  4 19:00:16 2023 UTC.  The chair is achow101. Information about MeetBot at https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings.
12:00 < core-meetingbot> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
12:00 < hebasto> hi
12:00 < achow101> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: achow101 _aj_ amiti ariard aureleoules b10c BlueMatt brunoerg cfields darosior dergoegge dongcarl fanquake fjahr furszy gleb glozow hebasto instagibbs jamesob jarolrod jonatack josibake kallewoof kanzure kouloumos kvaciral laanwj LarryRuane lightlike luke-jr MacroFake Murch phantomcircuit pinheadmz promag provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar S3RK stickies-v sipa theStack vasild
12:00 < josie> hi
12:00 < dergoegge> hi
12:00 < theStack> hi
12:00 < instagibbs> hi
12:00 < willcl_ark> hi
12:00 < cfields> hi
12:00 < achow101> Welcome to the weekly general IRC meeting
12:00 < pinheadmz_> Hi
12:00 < b10c> hi
12:00 < Murch> Hi
12:00 < lightlike> hi
12:00 < stickies-v> hi
12:00 < achow101> we've got several topics today from CoreDev
12:01 < kanzure> hi
12:01 < glozow> hi
12:01 < furszy> hi
12:01 < achow101> #topic Project priorities
12:01 < core-meetingbot> topic: Project priorities
12:01 < achow101> At CoreDev last week, we discussed as a group that we wanted to try something new with having priority projects for the next release cycle.
12:01 < neha> hi
12:01 < achow101> Priority meaning that PRs in the priority project will take merging precedence if they are (close to being) ready for merge but conflict with another PR that is not part of a priority project.
12:02 < achow101> The priority projects will also become permanent topics in the IRC meetings until the next release (or are completed) so that we can get updates on the progress of the topics and figure out what to do next to move them forward.
12:02 < achow101> The goal of this is to have things that we can make progress on and have a better idea of the kinds of PRs to actually focus on.
12:03 < achow101> Obviously other PRs can still be worked on, and no one is being forced to work on or look at the priority projects
12:03 < achow101> and this is just an experiment for the next release, we can change things if it doesn't work out
12:03 -!- Eric3 [~exeric3@dbox.skgaming.net] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
12:03 -!- ExEric3 [~exeric3@dbox.skgaming.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:04 < achow101> To determine the projects, we discussed having a vote. Many of us voted in person, but we also want the votes of those who weren't able to make it
12:04 < achow101> The projects are: Multiprocess, Erlay, BIP 324, Kernel, AssumeUTXO, Legacy Wallet Removal, Package Relay, ASMap, and Silent Payments.
12:04 < josie> is there a place to track what the priority projects are? or are we reusing the "high priority for review"
12:04 < achow101> are there any others that we may want to add to that list?
12:05 < achow101> josie: I think reusing that board is a good idea
12:05 < glozow> I think we can add a new column to the high priority for review board for "prioritized projects" or something
12:05 < jonatack> hi
12:05 < achow101> and also pin the tracking issues/prs for those projects
12:05 < glozow> And keep the bug fixes etc, as we will obviously want to get those merged as well
12:05 < instagibbs> Ideally I'd like an issue per project, ala https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27463
12:05 < josie> yeah, by tracking im less worried about "what" the projects are and more concerned about tracking the associated PR(s)
12:05 -!- brunoerg_ [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit []
12:05 < achow101> for the voting, please post your votes for 3 projects that you would like as priorities. we'll count them up and announce before the end of the meeting
12:06 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:06 < achow101> (obviously don't vote if you voted at coedev, we'll include those counts too)
12:06 < kanzure> not to nitpick but i'd like to call it a poll more than a vote *shrug*
12:06 < willcl_ark> We could also use temporary repo labels if that would help, but I think a tracking issue would probably be cleaner...
12:06 < josie> instagibbs: +1, having an issue to track PRs and discussion is nice. we could add the issues to the high priority for review board
12:07 < brunoerg> instagibbs: +1
12:07 < instagibbs> e.g., https://bip324.com/sections/code-review/ is stale, would be better imo to just have a tracking issue like package relay
12:07 < jonatack> "take merging precedence if they are (close to being) ready for merge but conflict with another PR" -> I thought this was informally the current practice 
12:08 < fjahr> issues can go stale too but I agree it's a good idea
12:08 < achow101> instagibbs: yeah, we should followup with the project authors to get a tracking issue
12:08 < instagibbs> fjahr I think the expectation is that is kept fresh on a weekly basis for meetings, if it's a priority project?
12:09 < achow101> fjahr: we'll followup each week, so hopefully they don't go stale
12:09 < fanquake> That + it's easy for someone else to update a stale issue if need be
12:09 < glozow> instagibbs +1, that's how I'm using 27463. I've edited the issue a bunch of times
12:10 < glozow> jonatack: yes, but the point here is to get a sense of which projects to prioritize
12:10 < josie> fjahr: perhaps the unspoken assumption is that a priority project has a champion(s). if those individuals are not updating the issues and PRs, I assume it would eventually be removed from the priority list
12:10 < fanquake> If they do go stale, I'd assume they are no-longer a priotity. None of this works if the person "leading" the project isn't actively involved
12:10 < fjahr> Ok, that does make sense, if that is being done it's good. I had issue keeping the tracking issue for coinstatsindex up to date but if there are enough eyes on it it solve that problem
12:10 < glozow> if I'm merging I feel more comfortable prioritizing something that the group has said they want to prioritize
12:10 < lightlike> i think that in any case it will be more important for the success of this new approach to get a better concentration of review on these projects (rather than merge priority).
12:11 < josie> lightlike: +1
12:11 < instagibbs> lightlike it's both pieces 
12:11 -!- jon_atack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:11 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:12 < glozow> Hopefully talking about the projects weekly will help keep momentum going!
12:14 < achow101> if you haven't voted yet and would like to, please do so at some point during the meeting
12:15 < achow101> #topic add ryanofsky as maintainer
12:15 < core-meetingbot> topic: add ryanofsky as maintainer
12:15 < _aj_> it might make sense for each priority project to have a single "priority pr" that's actively being reviewed for merge real soon at any one time; then anything that conflicts with that PR can be considered blocked, but things that conflict with other PRs in the priority project can still go ahead
12:15 < Murch> I had interpreted the voting at Core Dev to be just exploratory and that the actual poll would be conducted out of band when the entire set of contributors could participate during or after meeting. TBH, it feels a bit unfair to make people that were not able to attend to vote here now in public
12:16 < fjahr> achow: I guess people can vote with a dm to you if they don't want to vote in public, right?
12:16 < josie> _aj_: it would be really nice if the issue tracked the current state of the project, i.e which PR is currently needing review
12:16 < achow101> fjahr: sure, or glozow
12:16 < Murch> fjahr: good idea
12:16 < jon_atack> "which projects to prioritize" -> fwiw I just use the high-prio board for this, coupled with a general idea of the larger projects
12:17 < achow101> We (the maintainers) felt that there was a need for a maintainer who understood our interfaces and modularization efforts well, and we think that ryanofsky is a good fit for that.
12:18 < fanquake> The high-prio board has clearly been a failure to (really) prioritize anything substantial. The project also needs a bit more direction than "everyone just toss up what they want reviewed at the moment" 
12:19 < fjahr> Murch: +1 on the vote being pretty short notice. Maybe extend the voting period until the next meeting.
12:20 < glozow> I think the biggest problem with high-prio board is that we as a group don't collectively decide what goes on it. It's not a reflection of what "we" think is high priority.
12:20 < _aj_> it'd be nice to start prioritising projects and reviewing and merging them, rather than be bogged down in process for it for weeks...
12:20 < josie> _aj_: +1
12:20 < achow101> _aj_: agreed
12:20 < instagibbs> I have a feeling there are already 3/4 clear winners from last week
12:21 < glozow> Should we move on to the next topic?
12:21 < achow101> I think we can improve the process for next time, and there actually are some very clear winners
12:21 < fanquake> aussume utxo, bip324, kernel, package relay
12:22 < fjahr> yes, but we can not prioritize all of them
12:22 < Murch> _aj_: +1
12:22 < ajonas> when prioritizing projects and the champions fade or aren't moving things forward, what happens?
12:22 < achow101> fjahr: the plan was the pick the top 3
12:22 < achow101> ajonas: the project stalls until someone else wants to champion it? ideally there are multiple champions per project, but ultimately each pr only has one author
12:22 < fanquake> in that case, I think drop kernel from the list. As there is a minimal number of substantial PRs left for stage 1
12:23 < fanquake> I think they will be merged in the next week or two (ideally) regardless
12:23 < achow101> #topic project priorities (cont'd)
12:23 < core-meetingbot> topic: project priorities (cont'd)
12:23 < fanquake> and post that we could focus on the remaining 3
12:23 < fjahr> I think it would be better if we restrict it to an amount that is realistic to get into a release. So two probably.
12:23 -!- Guest0 [~Guest0@2804:7f1:e786:9838:6b47:74ae:9bcb:7b7a] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
12:23 < fanquake> with kernel stage 2/exploration still happening in the background
12:24 < cfields> Yeah,  it's worth mentioning this was titled "v26 priorities" in-person.
12:24 < hebasto> agree with fanquake 
12:24 < achow101> fjahr: the point isn't to complete them, it's really just to get forward progress and momentum
12:24 < instagibbs> fjahr BIP324/package relay aren't going to make it into 26 in entirety... absolutely no way
12:24 < _aj_> ajonas: i think for apriority PR, we should expect it to make progress in ~3 weeks, then get either merged or removed as a blocker (and reconsidered if updated in another couple of weeks). if a priority project loses momentum, then it just doesn't have a priority PR for a while and no longer manages to block anything else
12:24 < fanquake> assume utxo is also nearly a point of "completion" (possibly) already
12:24 < jon_atack> Note that every suggestion to add process over the past years to add process hasn't been terribly successful, i believe...i'm not convinced that adding process is a solution in an ad hoc open source project like this. one that, if anything, ought to become more decentralized. but sure.
12:24 < Murch> achow101: I thought the idea was to focus on some things that realistically could be shipped with v26
12:24 < cfields> ^^
12:24 < instagibbs> fanquake right that one might get close in 26
12:24 < brunoerg> I had same thought than Murch
12:25 < fjahr> then maybe we should just focus on one, I have seen too many projects fail due to a lack of focus and prioritizing 3 huge things equally isn't focus
12:25 < jamesob> really late hi
12:25 < jon_atack> yes, assumeutxo seems likely for v26 imho
12:25 < _aj_> i think 324 and package relay could reasonably make it into 26 if we don't stall out on review
12:25 < jon_atack> as i commented on the current step PR
12:25 < fanquake> if that was the assumption, why did we even have a vote
12:25 < brunoerg> I thought we would choose a project that is really close to be ready and it's just needing a nudge on review/dev to get ready
12:26 < achow101> some things are impossible to do in the next release just due to rollout timing
12:26 < fanquake> the only obvious choice would be assumeutxo
12:26 < fanquake> obviously we aren't shipping any of the other projects in 26
12:26 < stickies-v> i don't think being able to ship in the next release should be a requirement for a project being high prio, although ideally *some* of the high prio projects are shippable
12:26 < instagibbs> _aj_ the whole project? the crypto library changes aren't even merged for bip213
12:26 < instagibbs> 324*
12:26 < instagibbs> we can make huge strides for sure
12:27 < josie> at least for starting out, not sure if the exact number matters, but if we make progress on one or more of the projects, then id say the prioritization experiment was a success. we can fiddle with the number and process as we go
12:27 < _aj_> instagibbs: yes?
12:27 < achow101> we can also aim to ship them, but it's not necessarily failure to not ship
12:27 < hebasto> achow101: +1
12:27 < achow101> and the priorities aren't supposed to be things that prevent us from shipping a release
12:27 < ajonas> if the goal is to get big things in, we need to create an environment where reviewers on focused on those rather than working around the edges. They ship when they ship.
12:28 < instagibbs> _aj_ I'd love to be proven wrong ofc
12:28 < josie> ajonas: +1 
12:28 < stickies-v> ajonas: josie +1
12:29 < _aj_> instagibbs: for me, the main point is being able to pick a PR that's ready to merge, then work on reviewing and merging it, without that work being interrupted by conflicts that force it to get rebased
12:29 < cfields> As I understood it, we were picking projects that we'd prioritize for a release cycle.  For ex, given 2 long-lasting conflicting PR's,  one being a priority and one not, the priority project would get the implied focus and merge when ready,  potentially relegating the other to a later release.  But that doesn't mean that the priority item would be a release blocker.
12:29 < achow101> cfields: +1
12:30 < _aj_> instagibbs: i don't see why we couldn't be doing that for all four of the projects above for the next ~5 months or whatever, and have 324 and pkg relay provide usable features in 26
12:30 < jon_atack> cfields: right. (i reckon that can be resolved on an ad hoc basis when it happens tho)
12:30 < glozow> fwiw I split package relay into 3 milestones, and I think each one is a reasonable sprint for a release cycle if reviewers are there. I'll commit to responding to feedback and keeping issues updated as fast as possible ✋
12:30 < instagibbs> _aj_ definitely, I just didn't think everything would be deliverable
12:30 < instagibbs> sub-deliverables 100%
12:31 < achow101> I think we're all relatively on the same page
12:31 < _aj_> instagibbs: i'd rather be optimistic than give up in advance *shrug*
12:31 < achow101> we've got more topics for today
12:31 < achow101> #topic add ryanofsky as maintainer (take 2)
12:31 < core-meetingbot> topic: add ryanofsky as maintainer (take 2)
12:31 < instagibbs> _aj_ I like the energy
12:31 < instagibbs> (sorrY)
12:31 < achow101> We (the maintainers) felt that there was a need for a maintainer who understood our interfaces and modularization efforts well, and we think that ryanofsky is a good fit for that.
12:31 < Murch> So, it sounds like we more or less have picked the priorities and clarified what the criteria for a priority and the goal of the process are
12:31 < jamesob> ACK RUSS
12:31 < sdaftuar> ack russ
12:32 < Murch> ACK Russ
12:32 < jamesob> sdaftuar gets it
12:32 < hebasto> ACK on Russel
12:32 < josie> ACK russ 
12:32 < dergoegge> ACK russ
12:32 < brunoerg> ACK russ
12:32 < theStack> ACK russ
12:32 < fjahr> I don't know who russ is but ACK Ryan of Sky
12:32 < ryanofsky> ack ryan
12:32 < cfields> ACK Russ
12:33 < _aj_> ack ryan
12:33 < lightlike> ACK russ
12:33 < achow101> seems uncontroversial, we'll take it to github as usual
12:33 < b10c> ryan ack
12:33 < instagibbs> ACK russ
12:33 < furszy> ACK ryan
12:33 < fanquake> have my ACK russ tshirt on
12:33 < glozow> ACK
12:33 < jamesob> fanquake: nice
12:33 < sipa> ACK russ
12:33 < cfields> I can't imagine a less controversial candidate :)
12:33 < BlueMatt> ACK russ (but my vote doesn't count)
12:33 < josie> BlueMatt: not a vote ;) 
12:34 < stickies-v> ACK russ
12:34 < achow101> #topic Change IRC meeting time (glozow)
12:34 < core-meetingbot> topic: Change IRC meeting time (glozow)
12:34 < glozow> Our current meeting time was decided in 2015 when the group of contributors was fairly different wrt geographic distribution. Several people have expressed wanting to change the meeting time to better-suit our current set of contributors.
12:34 < glozow> Last week I sent out a doodle. You can see the results here: https://doodle.com/meeting/participate/id/ax25vR3d
12:34 < jon_atack> I'm not sure what the point of voting on IRC is, as after we saw similar support for Vasil, it became clear that it didn't matter
12:35 < glozow> 14-15UTC has the most votes.
12:35 < glozow> Therefore I propose we change our weekly meeting time to Thursdays 14UTC, starting next week (May 11).
12:35 < jon_atack> and that the real decision was made at a different level
12:35 < cfields> jon_atack: is that a nack?
12:35 < jon_atack> cfields: ACK russ, but i think the process is problematic
12:35 < achow101> jon_atack: it is to get an idea whether to bother opening the github pr in the first place
12:36 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@mail.dargis.net] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
12:36 < jon_atack> russ is an experienced and dedicated reviewer and long-term contributor
12:36 < josie> jon_atack: again, just to be clear, not a vote
12:36 < achow101> the irc meeting is meant for more discussion, if there is any
12:36 < hebasto> ACK on 1400 UTC
12:36 < jon_atack> he's clearly passionate about this projet
12:36 < cfields> jon_atack: roger, thanks for clarifying :)
12:36 < achow101> ACK on 1400 UTC
12:36 < stickies-v> ACK 14 UTC
12:36 < instagibbs> I didn't vote, I was suppressed!!! (I like the change)
12:36 < _aj_> that's -5 hours to the current time, and still not changing for daylight savings, right?
12:36 < achow101> _aj_: yes
12:37 < theStack> ACK 1400 UTC
12:37 < instagibbs> effective next week ?
12:37 < achow101> instagibbs: gotta check irc more :) we posted it multiple times
12:37 < glozow> Yes, effective next week, on May 11
12:37 < jamesob> 1400 UTC works
12:37 < fjahr> ACK 14 UTC
12:37 < brunoerg> ACK 14 UTC
12:37 < _aj_> and 1 hour before the optech review twitter space i think?
12:37 < josie> ACK 14 UTC
12:37 < dergoegge> ACK 14 UTC
12:37 < fanquake> ACK 14 UTC
12:37 < instagibbs> achow101 my room temp iq couldnt figure out the poll UX
12:37 < fanquake> better than 8:00pm
12:38 < b10c> ACK 14 UTC
12:38 < b10c> instagibbs: yea the site is terrible UX
12:38 < instagibbs> to be clear: ACK 14 UTC
12:38 < jon_atack> 14 UTC isn't a time I'll be able to make 
12:38 < Murch> ACK 14 UTC
12:39 < achow101> jon_atack: that is unfortunate, but it seems to be the best time for the most contributors
12:39 < fanquake> sounds like rough consensus
12:39 < lightlike> 14 utc works for me.
12:39 < fanquake> ship it next week
12:40 < Murch> _aj_: Good point, it’s actually in parallel to the Optech Recap :(
12:40 < josie> Murch: any possibility of moving the optech recap?
12:40 < _aj_> Murch: oh, is optech on dst?
12:41 < Murch> We switched it from 15 UTC because it was interfering with Lunch :p
12:41 < fanquake> not sure your lunch is a higher priority than this meeting tbh
12:42 < instagibbs> "you can't skip lunch"
12:42 < sdaftuar> i think there might be other days of the week
12:42 < fanquake> mate you're making me skip dinner
12:42 < cfields> Ok, can everyone agree to take lunch at 14utc,  meeting at 15utc? :P
12:42 < ajonas> fanquake: burn +1
12:43 < glozow>  should we have a poll for a different day of the week?
12:43 < dergoegge> no optech should move the day
12:43 < achow101> meh
12:43 < b10c> sunday?
12:43 < Murch> haha, fanquake: Don’t worry, we’re gonna move our thing rather than lobbying for moving the coredev meeting 
12:43 < sdaftuar> yeah i was talking to murch, sorry :)
12:43 < achow101> Murch: phew
12:43 < glozow> ah okay
12:43 < furszy> we can move lunch to sunday
12:44 < instagibbs> you are allowed to bitch about it for 2 episodes
12:44 < josie> glozow was already prepping the next doodle for day of week
12:44 < glozow> Great. Starting next week (May 11), we'll meet at 14UTC.
12:44 < glozow> nah I never want to use doodle again 🙈
12:44 < Murch> as if all of you are listening to our Recap live or smth
12:44 < achow101> #topic project priorities (what they actually are)
12:44 < core-meetingbot> topic: project priorities (what they actually are)
12:44  * Murch shakes his head
12:44 < glozow> I have not received any DMs
12:45 < achow101> nor I
12:45 < dergoegge> well then just take the poll results from core dev
12:45 < achow101> final counts are Multiprocess - 3, Erlay - 3, BIP 324 - 21, Kernel - 12, AssumeUTXO - 11, Legacy Wallet Removal - 6, Package Relay - 19, ASMap - 3, Silent Payments - 5
12:46 < achow101> so that would be BIP 324, Package relay, and kernel as our priorities for 26.0?
12:46 < sdaftuar> can you remind us of the champions of each project?
12:46 < fanquake> I would suggest swapping kernel for assumeutxo. I think kernel stage 1 will complete shortly, and stage 2 wont interfere with other priorities
12:46 < glozow> Can we hear from the people who are championing these projects?
12:46 < theStack> fanquake: +1
12:47 < fanquake> is thecharlatan here?
12:47 < jamesob> What I'll say is that assumeutxo is "nice to have" relative to BIP324 and package relay, albeit it's pretty close
12:47 < Murch> TheCharlatan: ?
12:47 < achow101> BIP 324 is sipa, package relay is glozow, and kernel is TheCharlatan
12:47 < _aj_> why not both assumeutxo and kernel?
12:47 -!- jonatack1 [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:47 < instagibbs> jamesob is assumeutxo
12:47 < jamesob> (i.e. BIP324 and package relay are more critical IMO)
12:47 < TheCharlatan> yes, still need to catch up
12:47 < fanquake> _aj_: yea that's what I mean essentiallyu
12:47 < achow101> _aj_: that seems possible too
12:47 < jamesob> kernel IMO needs some time to bake in terms of itnerface design... that can't be done overnight
12:47 < _aj_> if four projects is too many, we'll hopefully realise it at the weekly priority reviews relatively quickly
12:48 < jamesob> *interface
12:48 < fjahr> Again, three priorities isn't really focus. We will see the same result as with the high priorities board IMO.
12:48 < fanquake> Kernel is going to progress in any case, but once the finaly stage 1 prs are done, which they are not many of, it'll be out of the way, and stage 2 is more exploratory/non-conflicting, so can progress, and assumeutxo can be completed
12:48 < _aj_> and if a priority project just doesn't have a priority pr for a few weeks, that seems fine?
12:48 < instagibbs> fjahr pick the two you like then, if everyone picks two...
12:49 < fjahr> instagibbs It's not on me to decide, I am fine with the two that got the most votes
12:49 -!- jon_atack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
12:50 < sdaftuar> i think the main issue is reviewers; knowing that there are a lot of people stating an interest in review is helpful, as is knowing who those people are (so they can be bugged when needed)
12:50 < jonatack1> in any case, people doing review is what moves the dial
12:50 < achow101> fjahr: I don't think it will be the same as we will be asking for updates each week
12:50 < stickies-v> If kernel is gonna be merged in a few weeks then it'll stop being high prio at that point and we can vote on a next high prio, e.g. assumeutxo? 
12:50 < stickies-v> (phase 1)
12:51 < _aj_> it might be worth having 3 or 4 reviewers stick their hands up for each priority project, as well as a champion? (perhaps you can only be a nominated reviewer for one project, even if you're actually review multiple ones)
12:51 < sdaftuar> for my part -- i'm happy to review package relay and assumeutxo in the near term.
12:51 < sdaftuar> (assuming that others are lined up as well!)
12:51 < _aj_> 324+pkgrelay for me
12:51 < achow101> someone will need to make a bip324 tracking issue
12:51 < TheCharlatan> ACK for swapping as fanquake suggested, there's maybe like 2-3 stage 1 PRs left. 1 to clean the left over gArgs that I should draft on second thought, and by the looks of it 2 for handling shutdown.
12:51 < instagibbs> I'll be focusing on BIP324 and package relay. I can champion either in limited ways
12:52 < jamesob> I'm going to be looking at 324, as well as staying on top of assumeutxo as best I can. I have little doubt that others are going to want to see more automated testing than I have built for those changes currently.
12:52 < stickies-v> Package relay and kernel for me
12:52 < lightlike> I'll review the non-crypto content from bip324, plus the p2p content from pkgrelay
12:52 < fanquake> instagibbs: i'll get you a participation trophy
12:53 < achow101> TheCharlatan: is there a tracking issue for kernel?
12:53 < instagibbs> fanquake CoC violation
12:53 < TheCharlatan> I'm working on a new one.
12:53 < fanquake> Carl had one, but it likely needs some updating. Maybe we can start a-fresh for V2 atleast
12:53 < fanquake> TheCharlatan: great
12:53 < theStack> i'll focus mainly on bip324 review (mostly non-secp stuff, ofc)
12:54 < achow101> added draft items for kernel and 324. will followup later
12:54 < jonatack1> kernel and assumeutxo for me, most likely. more generally, i think what makes a difference is incentivizing the importance of reviewers as the key role. 
12:54 < instagibbs> achow101 you'll make sure someone is making tracking issues for those two projects you're saying?
12:54 < achow101> instagibbs: yes
12:54 < instagibbs> thanks
12:55 < glozow> for package relay. I'm happy to keep the tracking issue updated and give weekly updates at the meetings (now that we have a new meeting time). Sometimes it might take me some time to implement things but I'll be as responsive as possible. please feel free to ping me in this channel. I nominate _aj_, sdaftuar, instagibbs as potential champions if I get hit by a bus. for those of you who said you'll review, I will take liberties in nagging 
12:55 < glozow> y'all :P
12:56 < instagibbs> 4 minutes left
12:56 < achow101> Any other topics?
12:56 < fanquake> Test the most recent release candidates
12:56 < fanquake> bins are available
12:57 < Murch> I’m making progress on fuzzing for the qa-assets
12:57 < achow101> yeah, 24.1rc2 and 25.0rc1 are both up
12:57 < fanquake> We'll cut a 24.1 quite soon, if no issues come up
12:57 < Murch> Oh, should I also fuzz for 24.1?
12:57 < achow101> #endmeeting
12:57 < core-meetingbot> topic: Bitcoin Core development discussion and commit log | Feel free to watch, but please take commentary and usage questions to #bitcoin | Channel logs: http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/, http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/ | Meeting topics http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/proposedmeetingtopics.txt / http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/proposedwalletmeetingtopics.txt
12:57 < core-meetingbot> Meeting ended Thu May  4 19:57:45 2023 UTC.  
12:57 < core-meetingbot> Minutes:        https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings/logs/bitcoin-core-dev/2023/bitcoin-core-dev.2023-05-04-19.00.moin.txt
12:57 < Murch> I’ve just been fuzzing for 25.0
12:58 < glozow> Great meeting
12:58 < josie> glozow: make irc lively again
12:58 < fanquake> #productive
12:58 < sdaftuar> jamesob: i managed to load a utxo set (i think). hacked in a new rpc that takes a dumptxoutset from another node. however! it is taking forever to flush the chainstate to disk. is that what you have observed as well or is my computer just bad?
12:58 < Murch> glozow: +1
12:59 < jamesob> sdaftuar: yep, that's the longest part of the load process for sure. How long we talking?
12:59 < achow101> TheCharlatan: what's the next pr for kernel?
12:59 < jamesob> Shouldn't be more than ~10 minutes...
12:59 < sdaftuar> i'm at over 20 already, still going
12:59 < jamesob> zoinks
12:59 < jamesob> spinning disk or ssd?
12:59 < sdaftuar> close to 30 minutes. spinning disk yeah
12:59 < _aj_> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/Priorities -- if anyone wants to add themselves there, maybe
13:00 < sdaftuar> also maybe my btrfs filesystem is not optimized for this... i think i might have mirroring of data enabled
13:00 < jamesob> for what it's worth I've got a bunch of new changes on #15606 as of the last few days... once CI passes, I'll be posting comprehensive instructions for testing it out
13:00 <@gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15606 | assumeutxo by jamesob · Pull Request #15606 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
13:00 < achow101> _aj_: also revamping the high priority board: https://github.com/orgs/bitcoin/projects/1/views/1
13:00 < sdaftuar> oh sweet
13:00 < sdaftuar> i'm going to try to test some download logic... if this flush every finishes!
13:01 < jamesob> :)
13:01 < fanquake> meeting barely over and there's already assumeutxo progress
13:01 < fjahr> jamesob: turns out assumeutxo is slower than syncing the chain? ;)
13:01 < jamesob> fjahr: don't send me into retirement
13:01 < _aj_> achow101: drop the "needs rebase" ad-hoc entries and pkg relay from chasing concept ack?
13:03 < achow101> _aj_: done
13:05 < fjahr> achow101: did you change your mind about dropping the board? I thought you put that on the agenda as a topic :)
13:06 < TheCharlatan> achow101 next one is getting rid of whatever gArgs are still left over (I'll open it in a bit). Still working on shutdown, so don't know when that will be ready.
13:06 < achow101> fjahr: yeah, I did
13:06 < cfields> TheCharlatan: oh,  you decided to tackle shutdown afterall? What approach?
13:06 -!- abubakarsadiq [~abubakars@102.91.53.60] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:07 < cfields> Or you mean more like dealing with our current shutdown behavior?
13:07 < jonatack1> jamesob: nice, i'll be looking out for those changes on 15606 and the testing info
13:14 < TheCharlatan> cfields, yeah, the discussion you brought up at last week's meeting made me think it over. Currently I am tending towards a polymorphic solution that either wraps the current behaviour, or provides kernel users with enough context to handle destruction.
13:14 -!- kevkevin_ [~kevkevin@2601:241:8703:7b30:fdf9:a35f:16d7:9b75] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:16 < cfields> TheCharlatan: ack. I had been thinking it through since the discussion and arrived at throwing and catching at our boundary, then bubbling up to the user from there as an error and letting them handle as you mentioned.
13:17 < cfields> happy to review or work through it with you. It's kept me up plenty of nights :)
13:17 < cfields> Also I have commits which demonstrate the callgraphs if that'd be helpful...
13:18 < TheCharlatan> cfields: yes, it would :)
13:21 < cfields> TheCharlatan: roger.  Will generate it for you tomorrow.
13:30 < theStack> sdaftuar: just to understand your assumeutxo test scenario better (as i also plan to play around with it soon), what's the difference between the `loadtxoutset` RPC in #15606 and the one you hacked in?
13:30 <@gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15606 | assumeutxo by jamesob · Pull Request #15606 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
13:36 -!- mode/#bitcoin-core-dev [+o achow101] by ChanServ
13:37 -!- mode/#bitcoin-core-dev [-o achow101] by ChanServ
13:38 -!- ChanServ changed the topic of #bitcoin-core-dev to: Bitcoin Core development discussion and commit log | Feel free to watch, but please take commentary and usage questions to #bitcoin | Channel logs: http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/, http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/ | Weekly Meeting Thursday @ 14:00 UTC | Meeting topics http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/proposedmeetingtopics.txt / http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/proposed
13:46 -!- Guest82 [~Guest82@24-116-104-19.cpe.sparklight.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:47 -!- Guest82 [~Guest82@24-116-104-19.cpe.sparklight.net] has quit [Client Quit]
14:08 < sdaftuar> theStack: oh, thanks for the link! I didn't know where to find james' implementation
14:09 < sdaftuar> i think my implementation is a worse version of jamesob's, but accomplishes the same thing :)
14:10 < sdaftuar> i did have to add the blockhash from my dumptxoutset command (and the block height) to chainparams as a valid assumeutxo value. 
14:33 -!- jonatack1 [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.8]
14:33 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:36 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheCharlatan opened pull request #27576: kernel: Remove args, chainparams, chainparamsbase from kernel library (master...rmKernelArgs) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27576
14:41 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:42 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:47 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
14:49 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@144.121.170.186] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:54 -!- preimage [~halosghos@user/halosghost] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.8]
14:59 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:03 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
15:12 < ariard> ACK Russ maintainer + ACK 1400 UTC Thurs. new meeting schedule + package relay as my review prio
15:14 -!- bitdex [~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:21 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] mzumsande opened pull request #27577: p2p: give seednodes time before falling back to fixed seeds (master...202304_seednode_fixedseed_interaction) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27577
15:21 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:26 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
15:27 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:28 < _aj_> TheCharlatan: thought you mean remove kernel/chainparams*.cpp from kernel when i saw that title :)
15:32 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:33 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:35 -!- aielima [~aielima@user/aielima] has quit [Quit: Ciao]
15:37 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
15:37 < glozow> ariard: 🚀🚀🚀
15:46 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:51 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
15:57 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:03 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@144.121.170.186] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:04 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
16:07 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
16:11 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:12 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] benthecarman opened pull request #27578: Allow accepting non-standard transactions on mainnet (master...non-std-tx-mainnet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27578
16:16 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
16:17 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:24 < theStack> sdaftuar: nice! that's very instructive for sure. i'm going the way easier testing route, running james' pr (which already has the assumeutxo values filled in for height 788000) and trying to load the snapshot
16:25 < theStack> ./contrib/devtools/utxo_snapshot.sh is useful btw for creating a snapshot at height N, only discovered that after doing the rewind manually
16:33 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:38 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
16:42 -!- bugs_ [~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
16:44 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:49 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
16:50 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:55 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
17:07 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:11 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
17:40 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:45 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
17:50 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:56 -!- qxs [~qxs@gateway/tor-sasl/qxs] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:56 -!- ghost43 [~ghost43@gateway/tor-sasl/ghost43] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:56 -!- ghost43 [~ghost43@gateway/tor-sasl/ghost43] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:57 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
17:58 -!- qxs [~qxs@gateway/tor-sasl/qxs] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:59 -!- puchka [~puchka@185.203.122.61] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
18:00 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@user/AaronvanW] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:03 < jamesob> anyone ever see blockfilterindex fail to build because it couldn't read undo data for recently connected blocks? Trying to figure out if this is an assumeutxo thing or an outstanding issue on master
18:04 -!- puchka [~puchka@185.203.122.61] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:08 < jamesob> oh, nevermind, this is definitely an assumeutxo thing - can't have an aggressive (i.e. nonexistent) trailing prune window for the bg chainstate when building indexes, because it'll remove undo data too quickly. easy fix.
18:14 -!- test_ [flooded@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/flood/x-43489060] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:18 -!- flooded [~flooded@146.70.127.243] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
18:25 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:31 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
18:31 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@user/AaronvanW] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:31 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:39 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
18:43 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@user/jarthur] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
18:52 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:53 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@user/jarthur] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:56 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
19:05 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@user/AaronvanW] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
19:09 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:12 -!- szkl [uid110435@id-110435.uxbridge.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:14 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
19:14 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:19 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
19:35 < jamesob> assumeutxo testing instructions are up: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15606#issuecomment-1535622786
19:38 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:46 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
19:48 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:52 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
19:59 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:04 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:05 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:09 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
20:11 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:18 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:33 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:38 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
20:38 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:43 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
20:49 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:53 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
21:01 -!- cmirror [~cmirror@4.53.92.114] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:01 -!- cmirror [~cmirror@4.53.92.114] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:03 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@user/AaronvanW] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:11 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:11 -!- jon_atack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:14 -!- jonatack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:16 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:17 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:27 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
21:30 -!- qxs [~qxs@gateway/tor-sasl/qxs] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:30 -!- qxs [~qxs@gateway/tor-sasl/qxs] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:32 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:35 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@user/AaronvanW] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
21:36 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
21:49 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:55 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
22:01 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:06 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
22:07 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:12 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
22:24 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:28 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
22:41 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:45 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
23:08 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:13 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
23:19 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:24 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
23:25 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:30 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
23:33 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@user/AaronvanW] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:53 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:58 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4453:70a1:fac9:eff9] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
--- Log closed Fri May 05 00:00:52 2023