--- Log opened Thu Jun 19 00:00:16 2025
00:12 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:15 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:24 -!- mcey_ [~emcy@148.252.146.150] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:27 -!- mcey [~emcy@148.252.128.96] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
00:32 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
00:37 -!- mcey_ [~emcy@148.252.146.150] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:37 -!- mcey_ [~emcy@148.252.146.150] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:52 -!- S3RK_ [~S3RK@user/s3rk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:53 -!- Earnestly [~earnest@user/earnestly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
00:56 -!- S3RK [~S3RK@user/s3rk] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
01:14 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:18 -!- l0rinc [~l0rinc@user/l0rinc] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:20 -!- Dansken [~quassel@213.204.245.6] has quit [Quit: https://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.]
01:20 -!- Dansken [~quassel@213.204.245.6] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
01:20 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
01:35 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
01:54 -!- l0rinc [~l0rinc@user/l0rinc] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:02 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:16 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #32776: doc: taproot became always active in v24.0 (master...2025/06/taproot-bip) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32776
02:18 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 4 commits to 28.x: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e5a9e2435f16...e44d72b6480a
02:18 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/28.x 3cd4fdb Ava Chow: build: Bump to 28.2
02:18 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/28.x 90f78c7 Ava Chow: docs: Regenerate manpages for 28.2
02:18 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/28.x 7135d75 Ava Chow: docs: Release notes for 28.2
02:18 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32766: [28.x] Finalize 28.2 (28.x...28.2-final) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32766
02:21 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
02:43 -!- saturday7 [~saturday7@59.167.129.22] has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.10.0 - https://znc.in]
02:49 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
02:49 -!- saturday7 [~saturday7@59.167.129.22] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:01 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #32777: doc: fix Transifex 404s (master...transifex_404) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32777
03:06 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
03:10 -!- Cory81 [~Cory81@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
03:10 -!- Cory22 [~Cory81@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:27 -!- darosior1 [~darosior@109.205.214.46] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:29 -!- darosior [~darosior@109.205.214.46] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
03:29 -!- darosior1 is now known as darosior
03:34 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
03:40 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9a7eece5a4a1...79afe6b7c092
03:40 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8ee8a95 Sjors Provoost: doc: taproot became always active in v24.0
03:40 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 79afe6b merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32776: doc: taproot became always active in v24.0 (d...
03:40 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32776: doc: taproot became always active in v24.0 (doc/bips.md) (master...2025/06/taproot-bip) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32776
03:44 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/79afe6b7c092...b86141925416
03:44 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 53a996f fanquake: doc: fix transifex 404s
03:44 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b861419 merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32777: doc: fix Transifex 404s
03:44 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32777: doc: fix Transifex 404s (master...transifex_404) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32777
03:44 -!- darosior [~darosior@109.205.214.46] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
03:52 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
04:01 -!- jespada [~jespada@r179-25-212-225.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:11 -!- darosior [~darosior@109.205.214.46] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:32 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b86141925416...e18322eff274
04:32 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa94fd5 MarcoFalke: doc: Explain how to fetch commits directly
04:32 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e18322e merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32774: doc: Explain how to fetch commits directly
04:32 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32774: doc: Explain how to fetch commits directly (master...2506-doc-fetch-commit) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32774
04:36 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
04:56 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
05:01 -!- robszarka [~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:39ac:1176:703a:ac6f] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
05:02 -!- szarka [~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:39ac:1176:703a:ac6f] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:03 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:11 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@77-174-98-73.fixed.kpn.net] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [Closing Window]
05:20 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:23 -!- Cory22 [~Cory81@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
05:23 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
05:27 -!- jespada [~jespada@r179-25-212-225.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
05:34 -!- jespada [~jespada@r179-25-212-225.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:01 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14d:5285:8318:1539:25a7:bdf0:b72f] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:18 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #32780: lsan: add more Qt suppressions (master...qt_more_lsan) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32780
06:28 -!- Guest6261 [~diego@177.34.235.126] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
06:29 -!- diego [~diego@177.34.235.126] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
06:29 -!- diego is now known as Guest8072
06:55 -!- Earnestly [~earnest@user/earnestly] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
06:57 -!- Earnestly [~earnest@user/earnestly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:00 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
07:00 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:04 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e18322eff274...fa183045a1ea
07:04 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e285e69 zaidmstrr: test: Fix list index out of range error in feature_bip68_sequence.py
07:04 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa18304 merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32765: test: Fix list index out of range error in fe...
07:04 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32765: test: Fix list index out of range error in feature_bip68_sequence.py (master...test-feature-bip68-fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32765
07:05 -!- mudsip [~mudsip@user/mudsip] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:07 -!- mudsip [~mudsip@user/mudsip] has quit [Client Quit]
07:07 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
07:07 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
07:14 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fa183045a1ea...154b98a7aaae
07:14 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cd1ae1b brunoerg: fuzz: wallet: remove FundTx from FuzzedWallet
07:14 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 154b98a merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32772: fuzz: wallet: remove `FundTx` from `FuzzedWal...
07:14 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32772: fuzz: wallet: remove `FundTx` from `FuzzedWallet` (master...2025-06-fuzz-delete-fundtx) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32772
07:31 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #32781: refactor: modernize deprecated ipc headers (master...2024/06/tidy) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32781
07:39 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2803:9810:484c:6110:64b5:fbd0:e6cf:c1d5] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:07 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2803:9810:484c:6110:64b5:fbd0:e6cf:c1d5] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:09 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:23 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2803:9810:484c:6110:64b5:fbd0:e6cf:c1d5] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:27 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2803:9810:484c:6110:64b5:fbd0:e6cf:c1d5] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
08:27 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoincore.org] dergoegge opened pull request #1146: advisories: Add point of contact details for disclosures (master...sec-poc-details) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/1146
08:38 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
08:42 -!- OYENRAZOR369 [~OYENRAZOR@114.10.154.138] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:43 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 pushed tag v28.2: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/v28.2
08:47 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
08:54 -!- zeropoint [~alex@45-28-139-114.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:57 -!- Emc99 [~Emc99@212.129.85.147] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:57 -!- Emc99 [~Emc99@212.129.85.147] has quit [Client Quit]
08:57 -!- Emc99 [~Emc99@212.129.85.147] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:58 -!- Emc99 [~Emc99@212.129.85.147] has quit [Client Quit]
08:58 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
08:59 -!- Emc99 [~Emc99@212.129.85.147] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:00 <@achow101> #startmeeting
09:00 < corebot`> achow101: Meeting started at 2025-06-19T16:00+0000
09:00 < corebot`> achow101: Current chairs: achow101
09:00 < corebot`> achow101: Useful commands: #action #info #idea #link #topic #motion #vote #close #endmeeting
09:00 < corebot`> achow101: See also: https://hcoop-meetbot.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
09:00 < corebot`> achow101: Participants should now identify themselves with '#here' or with an alias like '#here FirstLast'
09:00 < TheCharlatan> hi
09:00 <@achow101> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: abubakarsadiq achow101 _aj_ ajonas b10c brunoerg cfields darosior dergoegge fanquake fjahr furszy gleb glozow hebasto hodlinator instagibbs jarolrod jonatack josibake kanzure laanwj LarryRuane lightlike luke-jr maflcko marcofleon maxedw Murch pinheadmz provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar S3RK stickies-v sipa sr_gi tdb3 theStack TheCharlatan vasild willcl-ark
09:01 < darosior> hi
09:01 < pinheadmz> Hi from AA3058 to PHX
09:01 < willcl-ark> hi
09:01 < sipa> hi
09:01 <@achow101> there is one preproposed meeting topics this week. Any last minute ones to add?
09:01 < stickies-v> hi
09:01 < theStack> hi
09:02 < lightlike> hi
09:02 <@achow101> #topic Kernel WG Update (TheCharlatan)
09:02 < TheCharlatan> Looking for review on #32317
09:02 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32317 | kernel: Separate UTXO set access from validation functions by TheCharlatan · Pull Request #32317 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:02 < TheCharlatan> ...and some more conceptual feedback on #32427
09:02 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32427 | (RFC) kernel: Replace leveldb-based BlockTreeDB with flat-file based store by TheCharlatan · Pull Request #32427 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:02 < sr_gi[m]1> hi
09:03 < TheCharlatan> I'm still not convinced by the counter proposal of writing single block files and getting rid of the block index altogether, but there have also has not been complete suggestions yet. I might try to write something up for that.
09:03 < TheCharlatan> that's all
09:03 <@achow101> #topic Erlay WG Update (sr_gi, gleb)
09:05 < sr_gi[m]1> I've been focusing on an issue with measuring the propagation time of the warnet simulations for the last few weeks, but I think I'm hitting a wall. The results I'm getting from simulations are promising regarding bandwidth, but the times seem too good to be true. I think something may be wrong with the way I'm testing for times, or there is a bug in the implementation that makes transactions propagate faster than they should
09:06 < sr_gi[m]1> I think I may need some extra set of eyes here, since I haven't been able to figure it out myself
09:06 < sr_gi[m]1> I'm currently writing this down and making it easily reproducible in case someone wants to give it a go, whether it is checking the code or the sims
09:07 <@achow101> is there a branch to look at?
09:07 < pinheadmz> sr_gi[m]1 is your warnet project repo up to date? 
09:07 < sr_gi[m]1> achow101: yes, the full implementation branch is up to date as of yesterday. #30277
09:07 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30277 | [DO NOT MERGE] Erlay: bandwidth-efficient transaction relay protocol (Full implementation) by sr-gi · Pull Request #30277 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:08 -!- bugs_ [~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:08 -!- eugenesiegel [~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:08 < sr_gi[m]1> The warnet repo is not, I'll update it today. The branch I'm using for the warnet tests is tho: https://github.com/sr-gi/bitcoin/tree/202406-erlay-full-draft-warnet
09:09 < sr_gi[m]1> But I'll get all cleaned up and ready today
09:09 -!- OYENRAZOR369 [~OYENRAZOR@114.10.154.138] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
09:09 < sr_gi[m]1> That's it from me. Happy to get anyone how's interested up to speed
09:10 -!- OYENRAZOR369 [~OYENRAZOR@114.10.154.138] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:10 <@achow101> #topic Cluster Mempool WG Update (sdaftuar, sipa)
09:11 < sipa> priority for review remains #31553, which got some recent review that led to discovering a bug in it (the eviction heuristic just wasn't as good as intended, fixed now, and contributed tests added)
09:11 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31553 | cluster mempool: add TxGraph reorg functionality by sipa · Pull Request #31553 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:12 < sipa> #30605 is not urgent, but pretty close to merge, i think; it's just test / comment improvements
09:12 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30605 | Cluster linearization: separate tests from tests-of-tests by sipa · Pull Request #30605 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:12 < sipa> it also includes a fancy ascii-art diagram
09:14 < sipa> i have rebased #32545 on top of 30605, as there was some overlap, and it can wait
09:14 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32545 | Replace cluster linearization algorithm with SFL by sipa · Pull Request #32545 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:14 < sipa> that's it for me, unless someone has questions/comments
09:14 <@achow101> #topic MuSig2 WG Update (achow101, rkrux)
09:15 <@achow101> bips#1867 was merged. #31244 is updated to allow duplicate participant keys, and all review has been addressed.
09:15 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31244 | descriptors: MuSig2 by achow101 · Pull Request #31244 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:15 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/issues/1867 | 390: Allow repeated participant pubkeys and disallow ranged participants with aggregate derivation. by achow101 · Pull Request #1867 · bitcoin/bips · GitHub
09:15 <@achow101> 31244 is still the pr to review
09:15 <@achow101> #topic move the repo to bitcoin-core (achow101)
09:16 <@achow101> wanted to bring this up again since there's some talk about changing CI, and having everything in one org would make that easier
09:16 < sipa> can you link to CI changing discussions?
09:17 <@achow101> There was some discussion in #31965, but afaict, most is happening in signal
09:17 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31965 | Revisiting us self-hosting parts of our CI · Issue #31965 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:17 < maflcko> I brought it up, but the general idea is that having two orgs will have to duplicate everything that is org-specific, not just org-teams
09:17 < sipa> right, of course
09:17 <@achow101> same org lets us also share caches
09:18 < dergoegge> I still don't think the potential downsides are worth the minor improvements
09:18 < maflcko> Currently the two worker pools are set up manually to share the cache
09:19 < maflcko> dergoegge: Are there any specific technical downsides that I missed? 
09:19 < dergoegge> technical no, but the main motivation afaiu was always non-technical
09:20 < sipa> for me the main motivation is non-technical; i don't know if that's the case for everyone
09:20 < darosior> This is how i understand it as well, and i tend to agree with dergoegge.
09:21 < sr_gi[m]1> That's also how I see it, but I won't be blocking this if there is consensus to move forward with it
09:22 < fanquake> Me too. (happy to take any and all of the other team/org actions, if needed. Should only be a handful extra a year)
09:22 < willcl-ark> Is there a problem with the status quo that is solved by moving?
09:22 -!- OYENRAZOR369 [~OYENRAZOR@114.10.154.138] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
09:23 < sipa> people thinking that BIPs are bitcoin core thing
09:23 < maflcko> willcl-ark: All the technical stuff that involves doing stuff twice (CI worker pools, CI settings, CI subscriptions, org-teams, ...)
09:23 < fanquake> To be clear, again, that duplicated technical stuff is trivial in number compared to all other actions needed to maintain the repo
09:23 <@achow101> maflcko: would have the ci in both orgs also cost us double since that would be 2 subscriptions?
09:24 < maflcko> achow101: Not sure, but I'd assume so
09:24 < dergoegge> what is the cost of the CI now?
09:25 < maflcko> dergoegge: Well, it is self-hosted right now
09:25 < maflcko> But there was discussion to change that (for various reasons)
09:26 < dergoegge> Right ok, I think the cost argument only makes sense if we know what it would actually be
09:28 < darosior> dergoegge: and if it's substantially higher than the cost of engineering hours spent in moving the repo and associated infrastructure
09:28 <@achow101> I think the current plan is the new cirrus runners, which is $75/mo per machine (assuming we get the nonprofit discount)
09:29 < darosior> How many machines we need?
09:30 < maflcko> darosior: You could probably do with a single machine (everything will just be slower) for that org. Not sure if devs will be happy with that
09:31 < darosior> At "feature parity" with today, how many machines we need? 2?
09:31 < willcl-ark> Reall cirrus machines are "16 cpu", so you can split even one machine into eg 8 x 2cpu jobs.
09:31 < fanquake> Things being slower in the GUI repo, doesn’t really seem like an issue? Given it’s running at a PR or two a week?
09:31 < fanquake> Probably not even that many actually
09:32 < maflcko> fanquake: Also, qa-assets and secp (aarch64)
09:32 < fanquake> Sure, qa-assets is less than that even, I guess secp256k1 slightly over gui
09:34 < dergoegge> secp Ci looks much less intense, e.g. the last arm64 cirrus jobs were 8 min each
09:35 < sipa> secp CI has a ton of CI jobs, but all fairly short
09:35 < maflcko> yeah, i think two runners (aarch64 + x86_64) would be enough. So that is 2k-4k per year, i'd guess
09:35 <@achow101> I think it's probably at least 3 machines, 2 x86, 1 arm. that at least matches the current setup
09:35 < sipa> i can't imagine money being the problem with those numbers
09:35 <@achow101> and per org
09:36 < darosior> achow101: ok thanks
09:36 < darosior> sipa: yeah
09:36 < maflcko> sipa: Yeah, it should be 10% of the other CI subscription, so money itself shouldn't be an issue
09:36 -!- dzxzg [~dzxzg@user/dzxzg] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:38 < maflcko> My thinking is that moving the repo should be mostly hassle free (obviously I can't promise it) and has been discussed for years, so doing it now to save some hassle when setting up the CI or in the future when handling teams seems fine.
09:40 < sipa> it makes sense to me, i remain of the opinion that it's just a confusing historical artifact how the orgs/repos are organized, and it's been discussed long enough to address it
09:40 <@achow101> i expect that making sure ci is setup correctly twice will cause more issues than moving the repo
09:40 < darosior> I think moving the repo is a consequential decision which comports risk. Doing so today seems unnecessary and pretty bad timing.
09:40 <@achow101> but i'm okay with revisiting this later. we previously discussed revisting during coredev
09:40 < sipa> but if too many people are skeptical, i'm not going to push it
09:41 -!- abubakarsadiq [uid602234@id-602234.hampstead.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
09:41 < fanquake> Regardless of any technical reasons, personally, I don’t think anything is gained by us trying to create some perception that doesn’t currently reflect reality. I think this is also undermined by the fact that we are just going to redirect to ourselves anyways (so where is the separation?) If we did drop an org level readme in /bitcoin, would we also be listing/linking to every other implementation in there? If not, that’d seem to 
09:41 < fanquake> undermine the premise as well. If the plan was to move everything out, except kernel, that would be more interesting to me.
09:41 < maflcko> yeah, I don't want to rush or push it. Just wondering why it is bad timing 
09:42 < sipa> fanquake: ideally there'd be a bitcoin-bips/bips and a bitcoin-core/bitcoin etc, and the bitcoin/ org remains vestigial just to avoid name squatting and for redirect
09:42 < darosior> I think it would be highly inadvisable for us to link people to alternate implementations that are not consensus-compatible with what 99% of the Bitcoin network runs.
09:43 < maflcko> yeah, the readme should just briefly say a redirect exists 
09:43 <@achow101> fanquake: ideally we wouldn't need to have redirects, but there's way too many links to bitcoin/bitcoin that breaking them would be a bad idea
09:43 < sipa> fanquake: i strongly disagree with the notion that kernel somehow deserves to be treated differently - it's a still just one implementation, and people can choose to use it or not
09:44 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
09:45 <@achow101> the point of having a redirect or links in a readme is purely to not break all existing documentation and habits, of which there are many. it's not to be an exhaustive list of implementations.
09:45 < sipa> achow101: +1
09:45 < fanquake> my point is that if /bitcoin is now meant to be neutral, why wouldn’t people ask for that?
09:45 < darosior> sipa: i think it is an overstatement to say "it is just one implementation". Kernel de facto defines what the network today will accept.
09:46 < sipa> darosior: no it doesn't, bitcoin core de facto does
09:46 < darosior> It's what i meant
09:46 < sipa> people can choose to use bitcoin core or not
09:46 <@achow101> fanquake: it's not meant to be neutral, it's meant to not exist. obviously it has to exist to not break anything existing
09:47 < fanquake> well /bitcoin does need to exist, to host the bips repo
09:47 <@achow101> bips can also move
09:47 < sipa> fanquake: well all of this would be much more meaningful if bips moves too
09:48 < fanquake> Is it going to?
09:48 < darosior> sipa: of course but i don't think it is related
09:48 <@achow101> no idea. I think opinions are split there as well
09:49 < maflcko> I'd say bips moving (or not) shouldn't affect or concern whether to move /bitcoin
09:50 < darosior> To be honest i feel like we are discussing whether to take a decision that could have nefarious real-world consequences just to make a philosophical point
09:50 <@achow101> darosior: what "nefarious real-world consequences"?
09:51 < sipa> darosior: i understand the concern of "people who aren't familiar will search for bitcoin and be confused when they don't find a reference implementation under bitcoin/" i guess, but really, i find it categorically wrong for bitcoin core (or kernel, or any of its related projects) to somehow present itself as being "bitcoin", even though today - and hopefully for long in the future - it remains de 
09:51 < sipa> facto what users use and thus defines the network
09:51 < darosior> achow101: confusing people and effectively leading them to run lower quality software to validate their money.
09:52 < willcl-ark> It might be good to also have a concrete answer to whether setting up and maintaining CI twice is hard/too much work, or not? Or if it's cost constraints, or something else. I've now heard that it both isn't (last year), and now that it is (so much so that it's a contributing factor for moving the r
09:52 < willcl-ark> epo). If it is, and we move to hosted runners, and don't move the repo then we will indeed need "double CI", but it's also unclear to me if even this is a problem (cost wise).
09:52 < sipa> darosior: TBH, i think it's more confusing the other direction
09:52 <@achow101> darosior: I don't see at all how that is a possibility. links to bitcoin/bitcoin will redirect. when you go to the bitcoin org profile, there won't be a "bitcoin" repository under there. I highly doubt any new person is going to github.com/bitcoin and looking for the "bitcoin" repo when they want to start using Bitcoin
09:53 < dergoegge> where is the perception of separation we'd be aiming for if the redirect exists?
09:53 <@achow101> the redirect will be permanent, and the bitcoin org owners aren't going to change in order to ensure that no new bitcoin/bitcoin that breaks the redirect
09:54 < sipa> darosior, achow101: yeah, this argument applies far more to bitcoin.org vs bitcoincore.org, but there the naming is already correct
09:54 < sipa> dergoegge: that seems like a strawman to me; over time, people will start using the bitcoin-core repo
09:55 < sipa> the bitcoin/ repo isn't there to to direct people (as repos won't even show up under it) to a specific implementation, it's to redirect old historical usage that hasn't updated
09:55 <@achow101> dergoegge: any new links people generate will be the new repo. when you go to the old link, it automatically redirects you to the new repo which says "bitcoin-core/bitcoin-core" or whatever
09:55 < dergoegge> ok so the hope is we'd be able to remove the redirect in time?
09:55 <@achow101> dergoegge: I'd love to be able to do that
09:55 <@achow101> it'll probably take more than our lifetimes though
09:56 < Murch[m]> dergoegge, I mean, you would not be looking at the bitcoin org anymore when browsing the repository, even if you got there originally by calling up the bitcoin org
09:56 < maflcko> I don't think it is possible to remove a redirect (other than to create a repo on top). Personally I think it is fine to leave the redirect
09:56 < janb84> There is currently a view of certain people that "bitcoin-core" is trying to capture bitcoin, wouldn't moving the repo now bolster that viewpoint and give extra negative backlash ? 
09:56 < sipa> janb84: i'd say it would do the exact opposite?
09:57 < Murch[m]> janb84: Could you explain why you think that, it seems like the opposite to me, too.
09:57 < sipa> who knows how things can be misinterpreted, of course, but logically, this is exactly moving away from the (understandable) misdirection someone might take from bitcoin core being under the bitcoin/ org
09:58 <@achow101> anyways, we're near the end of the meeting. if there are opinions, maybe they would be best expressed in #32340
09:58 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32340 | Moving this repo to bitcoin-core · Issue #32340 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
09:58 < janb84> it's a delicate topic ofc. again the good intentions are easily misinterpreted, "look they are now 100% trying to gain control"  etc
09:58 < darosior> I understand many (including me) are concerned with the confusion of Bitcoin and Bitcoin Core. However i don't think this means we should ignore the fact that anybody serious who wants to use Bitcoin today with real money on the line will want to use Bitcoin Core. Moving the repository is not going to change this reality.
09:59 < Murch[m]> At this point, anything we do seems to be represented in pretty much every possible way as there are a substantial number of Bitcoin geeks producing podcasts and blog posts that are overinvested in the OP_RETURN thing…
09:59 <@achow101> darosior: no one claimed it would change that reality?
09:59 < sipa> darosior: i certainly hope it doesn't!
09:59 < abubakarsadiq> the redirect from /bitcoin/bitcoin indicates that Bitcoin core is the dominant implementation :P
09:59 < darosior> sipa: :)
10:00 < sipa> but i don't see how bitcoin core not being under bitcoin/ would somehow mean we don't think people should use bitcoin core
10:00 <@achow101> #endmeeting
10:00 < corebot`> achow101: Meeting ended at 2025-06-19T17:00+0000
10:00 < corebot`> achow101: Raw log: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-06-19_16_00.log.json
10:00 < corebot`> achow101: Formatted log: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-06-19_16_00.log.html
10:00 < corebot`> achow101: Minutes: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-06-19_16_00.html
10:00 -!- Emc99 [~Emc99@212.129.85.147] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
10:00 < sipa> abubakarsadiq: just the historical one
10:00 <@achow101> willcl-ark: do we know, concretely, what steps need to be done in order to setup the new ci? that would inform us how much work we have to duplicate
10:00 < darosior> achow101: it seems the push to move is at least in part fueled by thinking we would face less pressure. I think this view is incorrect and falling into the fallacy that the Github repo matters to define what the Bitcoin network is.
10:01 < sipa> janb84: i mean, sure, i can imagine people saying that, but... that would literally be the polar opposite of what is happening?
10:02 <@achow101> darosior: I have had a couple of people say to me "well if you guys aren't bitcoin, why are you using bitcoin/bitcoin", so I don't think it's incorrect to say that we would face less pressure
10:02 <@achow101> but for me, the push to move is mainly the practical of duplicating work
10:02 < janb84> sipa: i'm affraid that the action of "moving" can be interpreted as hostile/taking control.  
10:02 < maflcko> willcl-ark: It should certainly be doable to setup the CI twice and cost about 2k-4k more (see above) maybe up to 10k, if we want more runners, but I think money or hassle can't be measured if people oppose this philosophically 
10:02 < darosior> achow101: these statements are motivated by the desired conclusion. They would find another reason to annoy you even if we moved.
10:03 < sipa> janb84: ... moving *away* is taking control?!
10:03 < pinheadmz> i think before any action is taken it would be wise to do some kind of PR and i dont mean pull request
10:03 < Murch[m]> Probably the attack would be more along the lines of "they are moving the repository to pretend that they have less responsibility"
10:03 < darosior> janb84: you seem confused. The point is to move away from bitcoin/bitcoin toward bitcoin-core/bitcoin.
10:03 < abubakarsadiq> achow101: is that less pressure really worth the switch. I think people will just come up with yet another controversy 
10:03 < pinheadmz> see what kind of take the tweeters have and address it in a blog or discussion to clear anything up before doing it
10:03 < janb84> sipa: yes, in the public eye. can 100% see that happing
10:03 < darosior> Murch[m]: yeah exactly
10:04 < sipa> janb84: yes, obviously, that can happen - but i don't think we should let our actions be determined by fear of people misrepresenting it as the polar opposite of what is happening
10:04 <@achow101> abubakarsadiq: i mean, it's about 30 seconds of work and no one has to actually change anything...
10:05 <@achow101> the hardest part is finding my yubikey to authorize the move
10:05 < janb84> darosior: i'm aware , it's the act of moving itself to some thing that is seen as controlled by core. it's deligate
10:05 < marcofleon> darosior: I think janb84 was saying it could be somehow misinterpreted as the "final step" in core taking control of bitcoin
10:05 < Murch[m]> Seeing some news that people are now mining transactions below min relay tx feerate
10:05 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
10:05 < marcofleon> but agreed that whoever would see it like that, it's likely not worth caring what they think
10:05 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:06 < janb84> marcofleon: yes that's what I mean. 
10:08 < pinheadmz> Murch[m] mononaut tweet or it didnt happen
10:08 < darosior> marcofleon, janb84: i see, thanks for clarifying.
10:09 < janb84> darosior: no worries
10:10 < Murch[m]> Haven’t seen a mononaut tweet yet, but: https://nitter.space/ottosch_/status/1935712233230639176
10:10 < Murch[m]> https://nitter.space/peterktodd/status/1935709056695775583
10:12 < pinheadmz> ah i thought it was gonna be a slipstream
10:16 -!- eugenesiegel [~eugenesie@user/eugenesiegel] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
10:19 -!- vasild [~vd@user/vasild] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
10:19 -!- vasild [~vd@user/vasild] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:35 < TheCharlatan> sipa, r.e. kernel deserving to be treated differently. if it becomes the common codebase for a bunch of implementations, it would be equally weird in my eyes if it were still in the bitcoin-core org and not a shared codebase to some extent.
10:37 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2803:9810:484c:6110:64b5:fbd0:e6cf:c1d5] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:41 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@138.199.6.197] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10:46 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2803:9810:484c:6110:64b5:fbd0:e6cf:c1d5] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:03 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
11:03 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:05 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:06 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:06 -!- Guest8072 [~diego@177.34.235.126] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []
11:07 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:08 -!- dviola [~diego@user/dviola] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:10 -!- saturday- [~saturday7@59.167.129.22] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:10 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
11:11 -!- saturday7 [~saturday7@59.167.129.22] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
11:18 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@142.147.59.145] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11:26 < sr_gi[m]1> I've included a description of the approach in #30277 to make it easier to review (cc/ achow101) 
11:26 < corebot`> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30277 | [DO NOT MERGE] Erlay: bandwidth-efficient transaction relay protocol (Full implementation) by sr-gi · Pull Request #30277 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
11:27 < sr_gi[m]1> The warnet repo is also up to date now pinheadmz: https://github.com/sr-gi/erlay-warnet
11:28 < pinheadmz> \m/
11:28 -!- TheRec [~toto@user/therec] has quit []
11:49 < sipa> TheCharlatan: perhaps, but even then i don't think it deserves the "bitcoin" label
11:55 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
11:55 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:11 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
12:17 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
12:17 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:26 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@142.147.59.145] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:27 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:32 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
12:40 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@138.199.6.197] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
12:57 -!- Guest25 [~Guest25@2401:4900:1c6f:f288:b852:a573:fa60:3012] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12:58 -!- Guest25 [~Guest25@2401:4900:1c6f:f288:b852:a573:fa60:3012] has quit [Client Quit]
13:03 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:23 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
13:23 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:24 -!- TheRec [~toto@84-75-224-26.dclient.hispeed.ch] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13:24 -!- TheRec [~toto@user/therec] has changed host
13:28 < TheCharlatan> sipa that's fair I guess - though I would not necessarily call that "deserves" :P
13:56 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:01 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
14:20 -!- TheRec [~toto@user/therec] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
14:20 -!- TheRec [~toto@user/therec] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:23 -!- TheRec_ [~toto@84-75-224-26.dclient.hispeed.ch] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:25 -!- TheRec [~toto@user/therec] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
14:30 -!- abubakarsadiq [uid602234@id-602234.hampstead.irccloud.com] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
14:36 -!- Guest63 [~Guest63@41.215.171.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:51 -!- jespada [~jespada@r179-25-212-225.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:51 -!- jespada [~jespada@179.26.250.100] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:54 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
14:59 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
15:12 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:17 -!- bugs_ [~bugs@user/bugs/x-5128603] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
15:19 -!- TheRec_ [~toto@84-75-224-26.dclient.hispeed.ch] has quit []
15:24 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14d:5285:8318:c1f6:19b0:5bdc:88fd] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:29 -!- TheRec [~toto@84-75-224-26.dclient.hispeed.ch] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15:29 -!- TheRec [~toto@user/therec] has changed host
15:46 -!- Guest63 [~Guest63@41.215.171.38] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
16:16 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
16:37 -!- bitdex [~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
16:38 -!- PaperSword [~Thunderbi@securemail.qrsnap.io] has quit [Quit: PaperSword]
16:38 -!- bitdex [~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:41 -!- PaperSword [~Thunderbi@securemail.qrsnap.io] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16:57 -!- OYENRAZOR369 [~OYENRAZOR@114.10.155.176] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17:03 -!- jespada [~jespada@179.26.250.100] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
17:07 -!- OYENRAZOR369 [~OYENRAZOR@114.10.155.176] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
17:45 -!- Earnestly [~earnest@user/earnestly] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
17:45 -!- Earnestly [~earnest@user/earnestly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
18:37 -!- PaperSword [~Thunderbi@securemail.qrsnap.io] has quit [Quit: PaperSword]
18:39 -!- PaperSword [~Thunderbi@securemail.qrsnap.io] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:17 -!- PaperSword [~Thunderbi@securemail.qrsnap.io] has quit [Quit: PaperSword]
19:33 -!- RoM3RoJava [~RoM3RoJav@187.108.15.144] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:34 -!- RoM3RoJava [~RoM3RoJav@187.108.15.144] has quit [Client Quit]
19:47 -!- emcy__ [~emcy@148.252.147.19] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19:50 -!- mcey_ [~emcy@148.252.146.150] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
19:56 -!- PaperSword [~Thunderbi@securemail.qrsnap.io] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:08 -!- robszarka [~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:e0e8:e9d7:88ef:38ac] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:11 -!- szarka [~szarka@2603:3003:4eac:100:39ac:1176:703a:ac6f] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:15 -!- TheRec [~toto@user/therec] has quit []
20:23 -!- TheRec [~toto@84-75-224-26.dclient.hispeed.ch] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20:23 -!- TheRec [~toto@user/therec] has changed host
20:36 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
20:37 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
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
21:26 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
21:34 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
21:57 -!- dzxzg [~dzxzg@user/dzxzg] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
21:57 -!- dzxzg [~dzxzg@user/dzxzg] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:17 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:21 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
22:21 -!- Cory22 [~Cory22@user/pasha] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:48 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22:53 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:55 -!- zeropoint [~alex@45-28-139-114.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: leaving]
23:08 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:12 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:16 -!- sbddesign [~sbddesign@user/sbddesign] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
23:20 -!- bitdex [~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
23:21 -!- bitdex [~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:24 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
23:51 -!- kevkevin [~kevkevin@209.242.39.30] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:52 -!- l0rinc [~l0rinc@user/l0rinc] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
23:55 -!- roconnor [~quassel@rocq/roconnor] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
23:59 -!- roconnor [~quassel@rocq/roconnor] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
--- Log closed Fri Jun 20 00:00:17 2025