1 2017-06-11 00:15:31	0|midnightmagic|So, you need to modify the options available and re-ping the others who might want another type of answer.
 2 2017-06-11 05:42:05	0|gmaxwell|instagibbs: so with these effective amount changes, perhaps what we should also do is have an effective size: e.g. if you are considering spending unconfirmed change from a prior transaction, you should adjust its size to whatever would be needed to CPFP the ancestors up to the rate you're targeting.
 3 2017-06-11 12:03:57	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14c45cbaf 15Andrew Chow: Fix stopatheight...
 4 2017-06-11 12:03:57	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/76f268b9bd1b...2e7d8f8b7d98
 5 2017-06-11 12:03:58	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 142e7d8f8 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10569: Fix stopatheight...
 6 2017-06-11 12:04:27	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10569: Fix stopatheight (06master...06fix-stopatheight) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10569
 7 2017-06-11 12:14:20	0|fanquake|wumpus are you merging a few prs now?
 8 2017-06-11 12:17:06	0|wumpus|fanquake: possibly, do you have other suggestions?
 9 2017-06-11 12:19:35	0|fanquake|wumpus Yea there are a few that look ready to go. 1 sec.
10 2017-06-11 12:19:57	0|fanquake|10560 is a easy merge/close.
11 2017-06-11 12:20:25	0|fanquake|10566 is a trivial doc chance.
12 2017-06-11 12:21:09	0|fanquake|10561
13 2017-06-11 12:21:51	0|wumpus|thanks
14 2017-06-11 12:23:03	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/2e7d8f8b7d98...562caf1c74fd
15 2017-06-11 12:23:04	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 143289ef4 15practicalswift: Remove unused constant MEMPOOL_GD_VERSION
16 2017-06-11 12:23:04	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14dce8239 15practicalswift: Comment out unused constant REJECT_DUST
17 2017-06-11 12:23:05	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14562caf1 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10560: Remove unused constants...
18 2017-06-11 12:23:12	0|wumpus|yes those look ready
19 2017-06-11 12:23:32	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10560: Remove unused constants (06master...06noop-modes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10560
20 2017-06-11 12:23:47	0|fanquake|Just unsure how many can be merged before one of them needs a rebase :x
21 2017-06-11 12:23:56	0|fanquake|10553
22 2017-06-11 12:25:03	0|wumpus|I was thinking again a few days ago it would be very useful to have a tool that visualizes which PRs conflict with each other. But I don't think that information is easily available from the API.
23 2017-06-11 12:25:19	0|wumpus|would also be useful to find duplicates etc
24 2017-06-11 12:25:44	0|fanquake|10546 should also be ok. I'm not sure what is being used to find the includes, but the pr didn't work on Windows initially, then broke again compiling. I'm wondering if it's possible we can inadvertently nuke an include for something like win32, and break something without noticing.
25 2017-06-11 12:26:11	0|fanquake|wumpus yea I think we may have even discussed a similar tool before? You mentioned you had a system for it at a previous job.
26 2017-06-11 12:26:16	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 147631066 15practicalswift: Use the "domain name setup" image (previously unused) in the gitian docs
27 2017-06-11 12:26:16	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/562caf1c74fd...5d034ee7faaf
28 2017-06-11 12:26:17	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 145d034ee 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10566: [docs] Use the "domain name setup" image (previously unused) in the gitian docs...
29 2017-06-11 12:26:41	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10566: [docs] Use the "domain name setup" image (previously unused) in the gitian docs (06master...06unreferenced-file) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10566
30 2017-06-11 12:27:43	0|wumpus|fanquake: yep, exactly, it was really neat, apart from that the revision control there was slow as molasses and so hard to navigate a lot of departmetns resorted to 90's-style changelogs at the top of C files
31 2017-06-11 12:29:06	0|fanquake|10568 could also go in.
32 2017-06-11 12:29:20	0|wumpus|fairly sure git can do it better, even a brute force "fetch upstream/pull/*/head for every open pull, then for every A on B try 'git merge'" shouldn't take too long
33 2017-06-11 12:29:29	0|wumpus|just need to find time to make it
34 2017-06-11 12:30:06	0|wumpus|it could even pre-optimize by skipping pulls that affect disjunct sets of files
35 2017-06-11 12:30:44	0|wumpus|+combinations
36 2017-06-11 12:31:43	0|fanquake|Yea, ideally it would "know" what PRs are most important, by looking at high the priority queue, and blocking merges that break something that's already been rebased 17 times and has a multitude of ACKs
37 2017-06-11 12:32:51	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e53a0fa 15practicalswift: Remove duplicate includes
38 2017-06-11 12:32:51	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5d034ee7faaf...e4918316d80f
39 2017-06-11 12:32:52	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e491831 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10561: Remove duplicate includes...
40 2017-06-11 12:33:18	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10561: Remove duplicate includes (06master...06remove-duplicate-includes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10561
41 2017-06-11 12:33:52	0|wumpus|well we have a list of high-priority PRs
42 2017-06-11 12:38:14	0|wumpus|so I guess the usual question for such a tool would be "would merging this low-prio PR force rebase of any high-prio PRs"
43 2017-06-11 12:41:36	0|fanquake|Should be able to do 10497 before 10193, as it's easy to redo the scripted diff, and it needs a rebase anyways.
44 2017-06-11 13:37:52	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1449de096 15practicalswift: Remove unused Boost includes
45 2017-06-11 13:37:52	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e4918316d80f...2c2d98806253
46 2017-06-11 13:37:53	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 142c2d988 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10546: Remove 33 unused Boost includes...
47 2017-06-11 13:38:18	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10546: Remove 33 unused Boost includes (06master...06remove-unused-boost-includes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10546
48 2017-06-11 18:27:50	0|txpending|Hi I am using bitcoin core and accidentally only added 0.00000798 BTC as fee. Will this tx be processed by the miners? How can I either stop that transaction or add a fee? Are there other options?
49 2017-06-11 18:42:18	0|instagibbs|gmaxwell, hmmm good point, it's like having smaller effective value, in those cases
50 2017-06-11 18:44:02	0|gmaxwell|instagibbs: and once we've selected it, we should add more fees to bring the ancestor bundle up to the current requested feerate.
51 2017-06-11 18:44:38	0|instagibbs|yep
52 2017-06-11 18:50:26	0|murchandamus|hi Greg, did you see my pm yesterday?
53 2017-06-11 18:52:00	0|txpending|any idea what to do in my case? Shall I "zapwallettxes"? Whats the risk?
54 2017-06-11 18:53:15	0|murchandamus|txpending: You're in the wrong channel, this channel is about Bitcoin Core development. You might want to ask in #bitcoin. Meanwhile this might answer your questionhttps://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/41972/5406
55 2017-06-11 18:55:08	0|txpending|murchandamus: thanks for the pointers! However, I haven't found a way in the bitcoin core QT gui to "Send all your bitcoins from the addresses recorded in step 1 to a new address with the recommended or higher than recommended fee."
56 2017-06-11 18:55:55	0|instagibbs|txpending, #bitcoin please, people will help
57 2017-06-11 18:55:59	0|txpending|since this is the dev channel, maybe this is a "feature request" ;-) I
58 2017-06-11 18:57:06	0|txpending|instagibbs: isn't it a usability bug if that's a valid usecase and the GUI doesn't provide means to cater for that?
59 2017-06-11 18:59:44	0|instagibbs|txpending, rather than continue arguing, please move it to #bitcoin. If the answers aren't satisfying, the place to go next is github repo and file an issue
60 2017-06-11 19:01:20	0|txpending|instagibbs: yes, I'll file an issue. wasn't my intention to argue, but I was rather afraid that my tx will be out there, never complete and my bitcoins are lost.
61 2017-06-11 19:01:33	0|txpending|have a nice day. bye.
62 2017-06-11 20:45:59	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #10573: Remove unnecessary includes (06master...06remove-unneccessary-includes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10573
63 2017-06-11 20:50:53	0|TheV01D|in 2017 , who removes headers :D
64 2017-06-11 20:53:16	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift closed pull request #10573: Remove unnecessary includes (06master...06remove-unneccessary-includes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10573
65 2017-06-11 20:53:36	0|sipa|nobody.
66 2017-06-11 21:41:18	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #10574: Remove includes in .cpp files for things the corresponding .h file already included (06master...06redundant) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10574
67 2017-06-11 22:14:01	0|gmaxwell|murchandamus: ypu just haven't gotten to it yet!
68 2017-06-11 22:54:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa opened pull request #10575: Header include guideline (06master...06includeguide) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10575
69 2017-06-11 23:46:24	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15gmaxwell opened pull request #10577: Add an explanation of quickly hashing onto a non-power of two range. (06master...06hashrange-comment) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10577