1 2017-06-14 01:06:27	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa pushed 5 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fbf5d3ba1516...1ad3d4e1261f
  2 2017-06-14 01:06:28	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 147c00c26 15Jorge Timón: scripted-diff: Fully remove BOOST_FOREACH...
  3 2017-06-14 01:06:28	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a5410ac 15Jorge Timón: Small preparations for Q_FOREACH, PAIRTYPE and #include <boost/foreach.hpp> removal
  4 2017-06-14 01:06:29	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1418dc3c3 15Jorge Timón: scripted-diff: Remove Q_FOREACH...
  5 2017-06-14 01:06:54	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa closed pull request #10502: scripted-diff: Remove BOOST_FOREACH, Q_FOREACH and PAIRTYPE (06master...06b15-boost-foreach) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10502
  6 2017-06-14 03:16:14	0|kvnn|gmaxwell : thank you.
  7 2017-06-14 03:43:44	0|jtimon|\open_poll Would you (A) or (B) #9176 once and for all? It's never costing rebase time but potentially review time just by being open: A: CLOSE, B: MERGE
  8 2017-06-14 03:43:45	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9176 | Globals: Pass Consensus::Params through CBlockTreeDB::LoadBlockIndexGuts() by jtimon · Pull Request #9176 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
  9 2017-06-14 04:07:12	0|gmaxwell|uh. what is up with #10584
 10 2017-06-14 04:07:13	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10584 | Remove unused ResendWalletTransactions notification by ryanofsky · Pull Request #10584 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 11 2017-06-14 04:44:15	0|phantomcircuit|gmaxwell, i think it's just wrong?
 12 2017-06-14 04:55:38	0|sipa|it looks to me he's removing only unused code
 13 2017-06-14 04:55:54	0|sipa|which it shouldn't
 14 2017-06-14 04:55:56	0|sipa|be
 15 2017-06-14 04:56:03	0|sipa|but maybe i miss something
 16 2017-06-14 05:07:54	0|gmaxwell|sipa: hm? it's hooked up to the Broadcast signal, which is invoked from SendMessages.
 17 2017-06-14 05:15:17	0|sipa|oh
 18 2017-06-14 05:17:15	0|gmaxwell|have I said before that I do not slots and signals they and overhead and _obscure control flow_? :P
 19 2017-06-14 05:46:19	0|sipa|gmaxwell: well i'm confused by ryanofsky thinks it's unused
 20 2017-06-14 05:47:37	0|gmaxwell|maybe there is some pattern used in the codebase which makes the control flow less clear to him? :P  (I thought we had tests though for wallet retransmission, but seems the tests are passing. :( )
 21 2017-06-14 06:40:52	0|jonasschnelli|Anyone up for a quick wallet PR review with great positive performance impacts: #10251
 22 2017-06-14 06:40:53	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10251 | Add balances cache / GUI: use a signal instead of a poll thread by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10251 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 23 2017-06-14 06:45:40	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10584: Remove unused ResendWalletTransactions notification (06master...06pr/noresend) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10584
 24 2017-06-14 06:50:41	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15kallewoof opened pull request #10585: [WIP] PoW connection slots (06master...06pow-connection-slots) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10585
 25 2017-06-14 07:11:04	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15NicolasDorier closed pull request #9991: listreceivedbyaddress Filter Address (06master...06listreceivedbyaddress-filtered) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9991
 26 2017-06-14 10:57:14	0|wumpus|any problems with 0.14.2rc2 reported yet? anyone have anything to add to the release notes? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.14/doc/release-notes.md
 27 2017-06-14 10:57:32	0|wumpus|if not, it may be time to cut the release
 28 2017-06-14 13:22:47	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14cb24c85 15Pieter Wuille: Use rdrand as entropy source on supported platforms
 29 2017-06-14 13:22:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1ad3d4e1261f...b63be2c6852f
 30 2017-06-14 13:22:48	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14b63be2c 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10377: Use rdrand as entropy source on supported platforms...
 31 2017-06-14 13:23:18	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10377: Use rdrand as entropy source on supported platforms (06master...06hwrand) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10377
 32 2017-06-14 13:28:15	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ec98b78 15Andrew Chow: Tests for wallet encryption stuff...
 33 2017-06-14 13:28:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b63be2c6852f...6702617c868a
 34 2017-06-14 13:28:16	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146702617 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10551: [Tests] Wallet encryption functional tests...
 35 2017-06-14 13:28:57	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10551: [Tests] Wallet encryption functional tests (06master...06wallet-encrypt-test) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10551
 36 2017-06-14 13:36:27	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10081: Add 'dumpbootstrap' RPC for creating bootstrap.dat files. (06master...06dumpbootstrap) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10081
 37 2017-06-14 13:39:06	0|ryanofsky|re: "well i'm confused by ryanofsky thinks it's unused" just a mistake, my brain wasn't working, and the naming for that signal doesn't follow the normal pattern
 38 2017-06-14 13:49:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146294f32 15John Newbery: gettxoutproof() should return consistent result...
 39 2017-06-14 13:49:13	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/6702617c868a...c94b89e90d6a
 40 2017-06-14 13:49:14	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14c94b89e 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9738: gettxoutproof() should return consistent result...
 41 2017-06-14 13:49:33	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9738: gettxoutproof() should return consistent result (06master...06fixgettxoutproof) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9738
 42 2017-06-14 14:12:37	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 141d1ea9f 15Marko Bencun: Turn TryCreateDirectory() into TryCreateDirectories()...
 43 2017-06-14 14:12:37	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c94b89e90d6a...228c319a944b
 44 2017-06-14 14:12:38	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14228c319 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9895: Turn TryCreateDirectory() into TryCreateDirectories()...
 45 2017-06-14 14:13:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9895: Turn TryCreateDirectory() into TryCreateDirectories() (06master...06appinitmain) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9895
 46 2017-06-14 15:16:42	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15morcos opened pull request #10586: More economical fee estimates for opt-in-RBF transactions (06master...06aggressiveEstimates) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10586
 47 2017-06-14 15:40:59	0|morcos|sipa: Ruling requested
 48 2017-06-14 15:41:12	0|morcos|What is the style guide for an rpc named argument?
 49 2017-06-14 15:41:19	0|morcos|conf_target?
 50 2017-06-14 15:41:53	0|morcos|we already have a confTarget inside the options for bumpfee, but its inside the options, and it seems most named argumetns aren't camelCase
 51 2017-06-14 15:43:59	0|sipa|from developer-notes.md, under RPC:
 52 2017-06-14 15:44:01	0|sipa|Argument naming: use snake case fee_delta (and not, e.g. camel case feeDelta)
 53 2017-06-14 15:44:04	0|sipa|Rationale: Consistency with existing interface.
 54 2017-06-14 15:50:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #10587: Net: Fix resource leak in ReadBinaryFile(...) (06master...06fopen-not-followed-by-fclose-in-all-states-of-the-universe) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10587
 55 2017-06-14 15:57:06	0|morcos|sipa: oops, sorry i didn't read
 56 2017-06-14 17:04:52	0|cfields|jtimon: ping
 57 2017-06-14 17:06:23	0|jtimon|cfields: pong
 58 2017-06-14 17:06:47	0|cfields|jtimon: I'm confused. At one point, you had a version of the reverse_iterator that compiled, but failed tests. no?
 59 2017-06-14 17:07:56	0|jtimon|yes, and then I followed your advice for the prevector tests, which was the part that didn't compile unless I commented those lines (but if I did comment them, then the tests failed as they should)
 60 2017-06-14 17:08:56	0|cfields|jtimon: can you point me to a failing revision?
 61 2017-06-14 17:09:19	0|cfields|jtimon: oooooh
 62 2017-06-14 17:09:43	0|cfields|jtimon: the tests failed because some things were commented out, not because of new breakage?
 63 2017-06-14 17:15:44	0|jtimon|right the breakage was a compile error
 64 2017-06-14 17:16:25	0|jtimon|sorry, I shouldn't have commented the lines, and should had left the compile error there, I just wanted to see what else would fail
 65 2017-06-14 17:33:16	0|cfields|jtimon: ok, i misunderstood, then
 66 2017-06-14 17:33:50	0|cfields|jtimon: i wrote some quick tests locally, and everything passed. So I'm not so concerned about the scope issue anymore
 67 2017-06-14 17:35:05	0|cfields|jtimon: compile fix is here: https://pastebin.com/raw/2zscDfbq
 68 2017-06-14 18:12:23	0|jtimon|cfields: oh, thanks! I tried to do the reverse iterator more const, but not the prevector!
 69 2017-06-14 18:35:35	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15morcos opened pull request #10588: Note preexisting bug in display of fee calculation in coin control (060.14...06notebug) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10588
 70 2017-06-14 19:18:06	0|instagibbs|anyone know the reasoning for the "keyword definition" stuff in importmulti.py? A couple of those strings don't even occur, and none of the variables are ever used.
 71 2017-06-14 19:18:10	0|instagibbs|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/importmulti.py#L24
 72 2017-06-14 19:24:35	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15morcos opened pull request #10589: Add RPC options for RBF, confirmation target and conservative fee estimates (06master...06rpcestimatechoice) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10589
 73 2017-06-14 19:33:57	0|instagibbs|morcos, really wish we could get some basic effective value logic in so we could easily improve bumpfee as well.
 74 2017-06-14 19:34:53	0|morcos|how does that help with improving bumpfee?
 75 2017-06-14 19:37:37	0|instagibbs|Well, I guess we could just lamely loop and keep increasing until it grabs enough effective value...
 76 2017-06-14 19:38:05	0|instagibbs|the sickness spreading :P
 77 2017-06-14 19:38:26	0|instagibbs|right now bumpfee must have a change output to be successful
 78 2017-06-14 19:40:09	0|morcos|instagibbs: yes but i don't understand how thats related to the effective value logic?
 79 2017-06-14 19:40:55	0|instagibbs|if we had effective value logic, it would be easier? Sorry I'm missing what you're missing.
 80 2017-06-14 19:41:05	0|morcos|i thought the reason bumpfee had to have change had something to do with the complication of adding new inputs which may mean there are multiple txs being replaced
 81 2017-06-14 19:41:16	0|instagibbs|ah, maybe that's a reason
 82 2017-06-14 19:41:32	0|morcos|i dont' think the requirement that we had change to reduce in order to bump fee had anything to do with our stupid coin selection
 83 2017-06-14 19:41:42	0|morcos|in any case, i'm all for improving coin selection.
 84 2017-06-14 19:42:21	0|instagibbs|why would adding confirmed inputs replace multiple txs?
 85 2017-06-14 19:42:35	0|instagibbs|maybe I should go hunt down the bumpfee PR, find the undocumented assumptions
 86 2017-06-14 19:42:42	0|morcos|but limited cycles..  i owe sipa and bluematt tons of review too, but i'm about to be away from work for a bit, so i just wanted to push out the fee changes i think we need for 0.15
 87 2017-06-14 19:42:49	0|instagibbs|Understood
 88 2017-06-14 19:43:08	0|morcos|instagibbs: i don't remember exactly now, but i thin kthe idea was just to limit it to the simplest possible case for starters
 89 2017-06-14 19:43:20	0|morcos|not that we can't do other things , but just to get the first round in
 90 2017-06-14 19:43:56	0|instagibbs|I totally agree, which is why I was thinking about coin selection in that respect.
 91 2017-06-14 19:44:22	0|instagibbs|anyways I'll revisit it post-0.15
 92 2017-06-14 19:49:20	0|sipa|instagibbs, morcos: achow101 and i are looking at murch's branch&bound algorithm for coin selection
 93 2017-06-14 19:50:32	0|instagibbs|great. We might not care about exact matches when hitting `bumpfee`, since we may want followup change
 94 2017-06-14 19:51:18	0|instagibbs|without linking a bunch of inputs together greedily
 95 2017-06-14 20:21:51	0|murch|@sipa: What are you guys doing this evening?
 96 2017-06-14 20:23:27	0|murch|I assume you have found the branch in my github repo?
 97 2017-06-14 20:23:44	0|sipa|murch: yup
 98 2017-06-14 20:23:47	0|sipa|see pm
 99 2017-06-14 20:44:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #10591: [tests] make pruning.py faster (06master...06fastprune) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10591
100 2017-06-14 21:15:07	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #10592: [trivial] fix indentation for ArgsManager class (06master...06argsmanager) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10592
101 2017-06-14 21:41:50	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15luke-jr closed pull request #10512: Rework same-chain from abusing DoS banning, to explicit checks (06master...06samechain_rework) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10512
102 2017-06-14 21:42:25	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15luke-jr opened pull request #10593: Relax punishment for peers relaying invalid blocks and headers (06master...06relax_invblk_punishment) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10593
103 2017-06-14 21:42:35	0|gmaxwell|instagibbs: I believe the reason for fixing the inputs was just to simplify the first implementation.
104 2017-06-14 21:43:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15luke-jr opened pull request #10594: Bugfix: net: Apply whitelisting criteria to outgoing connections (06master...06whitelist_outgoing) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10594
105 2017-06-14 21:43:39	0|gmaxwell|Also, it's preferable to not use extra inputs if you can avoid it, because you'll burn down your unspent outputs available for other transactions. (keep in mind you really don't want to spend the bump change, since you can't be sure which version will confirm)