1 2016-06-12 03:31:08	0|GitHub196|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake opened pull request #8192: [trivial] Add a link to the Bitcoin-Core repository to the About Dialog (06master...06source-code-link) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8192
 2 2016-06-12 12:37:37	0|GitHub158|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake opened pull request #8193: [trivial][doc] Use Debian 8.5 in the gitian-build guide (06master...06gitian-debian-85) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8193
 3 2016-06-12 13:38:53	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8035#issuecomment-225366630
 4 2016-06-12 13:39:33	0|jonasschnelli|At the moment, the change will not result in HD keys when setting -usehd=1 if your wallet already exists.
 5 2016-06-12 13:40:01	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: i'm aware
 6 2016-06-12 13:40:13	0|jonasschnelli|Do you think we should detect if the wallet was created with -usehd=0 (non had) and abort startup if someonw passed -usehd=1 afterwards?
 7 2016-06-12 13:40:15	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: i'm not suggesting to change that
 8 2016-06-12 13:40:20	0|sipa|yes
 9 2016-06-12 13:40:46	0|sipa|it's completely counterintuitive to start with -usehd=1, accidentally load a non-hd wallet, and continuing without knowing\
10 2016-06-12 13:40:51	0|jonasschnelli|Okay. I see. So usehd=1 in a case where the wallet exists = abort init
11 2016-06-12 13:41:02	0|jonasschnelli|I agree. This little check makes sense.
12 2016-06-12 13:41:09	0|sipa|where the wallet exists and it isn't already an hd wallet
13 2016-06-12 13:42:02	0|jonasschnelli|Same with usehd=0 (if the wallted was created with usehd=1).
14 2016-06-12 13:42:10	0|sipa|indeed
15 2016-06-12 13:43:08	0|instagibbs|jonasschnelli, I think I made the same point for the previous HD PR IIRC
16 2016-06-12 13:44:23	0|instagibbs|(so +1 for something like that)
17 2016-06-12 14:00:12	0|GitHub3|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #8194: [gitian] set correct PATH for wrappers (06master...06Mf1606-gitianPath) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8194
18 2016-06-12 21:35:21	0|whu|Hi .. Hi how can I run bitcoin core such that it only cares about the accepted blocks and not the rest of the p2p stuff ?
19 2016-06-12 21:35:53	0|whu|I am planning to run testnet and want to save on bandwitdth...
20 2016-06-12 21:36:12	0|sipa|-blocksonly
21 2016-06-12 21:36:30	0|sipa|will make it not advertize, request, or download any transactions
22 2016-06-12 21:36:57	0|sipa|there will still be some overhead of ping, address relay, ... but that's marginal
23 2016-06-12 21:37:52	0|whu|Could you ballpark how much bandwidth that is likely to incur in a month...?
24 2016-06-12 21:38:27	0|sipa|on testnet? no clue, it will depend on what kind of weird things people are doing on it
25 2016-06-12 21:39:12	0|whu|But if I am doing with -blocksonly wouldnt it be just the b/w for 1 block every10 minutes??
26 2016-06-12 21:39:35	0|sipa|on mainnet that would be true (assuming you also only have a single connection)
27 2016-06-12 21:39:44	0|sipa|on testnet, block creation is very irregular
28 2016-06-12 21:40:26	0|whu|Okay ... off the topic... Are you Peter Wuille?
29 2016-06-12 21:40:33	0|whu|:)
30 2016-06-12 21:41:02	0|whu|Anyway thanks a lot for humouring noobs like me...
31 2016-06-12 21:41:13	0|sipa|yes
32 2016-06-12 21:41:16	0|sipa|:)
33 2016-06-12 21:49:43	0|luke-jr|Pieter*
34 2016-06-12 21:52:27	0|slackircbridge1|<moli> Dr. Pieter Wuille*
35 2016-06-12 21:52:43	0|sipa|details
36 2016-06-12 21:58:21	0|whu|I'm so sorry , Dr Pieter Wuille ...
37 2016-06-12 21:58:45	0|whu|:)
38 2016-06-12 22:00:10	0|whu|I dont know whether this question is appropriate for this forum... but do you think Brexit will be good for bitcoin ?
39 2016-06-12 22:02:46	0|slackircbridge1|<patel> It's not appropriate, please take it to a price talk or speculation forum
40 2016-06-12 22:05:25	0|sipa|or #bitcoin
41 2016-06-12 22:05:30	0|sipa|or #bitcoin-pricetalk
42 2016-06-12 22:53:42	0|Lauda|sipa is segwit going to be included in the next version? I've failed to find relevant information.
43 2016-06-12 22:54:10	0|sipa|Lauda: that will depend on whether it gets sufficient review
44 2016-06-12 22:54:14	0|sipa|it gets in when it gets in
45 2016-06-12 22:54:37	0|Lauda|What do you think though? Is there a scheduled date for 0.12.2'
46 2016-06-12 22:54:38	0|Lauda|?
47 2016-06-12 22:54:52	0|sipa|there is a release schedule for 0.13.0
48 2016-06-12 22:55:03	0|sipa|0.12.2 will just be a backport of bugfixes from the 0.13 tree
49 2016-06-12 22:55:26	0|sipa|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7679
50 2016-06-12 22:56:04	0|Lauda|So the AIM is 1st of August? Okay, thanks.
51 2016-06-12 22:56:06	0|sipa|bugfixes and softforks... like segwit
52 2016-06-12 22:56:16	0|sipa|0.12.2 may be released before 0.13.0