1 2017-10-10 00:33:24 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15promag closed pull request #10966: Add walletnotify functional test (06master...062017-07-walletnotify-functional-test) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10966
2 2017-10-10 07:01:31 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f902e40 15Johannes Kanig: fix typo in comment of chain.cpp
3 2017-10-10 07:01:31 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e022463a4b23...5a9da37fb3f4
4 2017-10-10 07:01:32 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 145a9da37 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11469: fix typo in comment of chain.cpp...
5 2017-10-10 07:02:06 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11469: fix typo in comment of chain.cpp (06master...06typo-fix-in-comment) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11469
6 2017-10-10 08:45:18 0|fanquake|wumpus are you able to merge #7 on the univalue repo. The same change had ACKs from sipa and gmaxwell in #6 if your waiting for more reviewers.
7 2017-10-10 08:45:19 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7 | Block-header-only, faster startup client ÷ Issue #7 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
8 2017-10-10 08:45:21 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6 | Treat wallet as a generic keystore ÷ Issue #6 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
9 2017-10-10 08:45:46 0|fanquake|Then we can review and merge #11420 on the main repo.
10 2017-10-10 08:45:47 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11420 | Bump univalue subtree and fix json formatting in tests by MarcoFalke ÷ Pull Request #11420 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
11 2017-10-10 08:48:49 0|sipa|fanquake: will do tomorrow
12 2017-10-10 08:50:12 0|fanquake|sipa cheers
13 2017-10-10 09:28:05 0|thermoman|the contents of https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.15.0.1/bitcoin-0.15.0.1.tar.gz is in a subdirectory named "bitcoin-0.15.0".
14 2017-10-10 09:28:36 0|thermoman|that's bad since the version in the extracted directory is not exacly the version of the archive file
15 2017-10-10 09:29:18 0|thermoman|this adds confusion, especially if you had extracted bitcoin-0.15.0.tar.gz earlier
16 2017-10-10 09:29:52 0|thermoman|bitcoin-0.15.0/
17 2017-10-10 09:29:52 0|thermoman|% tar tf bitcoin-0.15.0.1.tar.gz | head -n 1
18 2017-10-10 10:21:06 0|Guest81526|Chico then?
19 2017-10-10 13:55:33 0|hardik_|hi
20 2017-10-10 14:22:30 0|jnewbery|#7061 should be merged soon. It's been reviewed to death. Perhaps reACKs from ryanofsky kallewoof if they're still interested.
21 2017-10-10 14:22:34 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7061 | [Wallet] Add RPC call "rescanblockchain " by jonasschnelli ÷ Pull Request #7061 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
22 2017-10-10 14:27:15 0|GAit|wumpus: just noticed an error in the release notes for 0.15.0/0.15.0.1 not sure if already reported: "maximumCount - a number specifying the minimum number of UTXOs" - minimum vs maximum
23 2017-10-10 14:41:14 0|promag|GAit: IIRC that was already detected
24 2017-10-10 14:41:59 0|instagibbs|yes there's already a PR for a fix
25 2017-10-10 14:48:27 0|promag|jnewbery: regarding #7061, at the moment the RPC can block a lot of time
26 2017-10-10 14:48:33 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7061 | [Wallet] Add RPC call "rescanblockchain " by jonasschnelli ÷ Pull Request #7061 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
27 2017-10-10 14:49:06 0|promag|do you think this can be avoided in followups?
28 2017-10-10 16:31:36 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15thomasstep opened pull request #11474: Fixing pointer asterisk (06master...06TypoFix) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11474
29 2017-10-10 16:34:36 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15mess110 closed pull request #11455: CTxMemPool::GetMinFee should not return CFeeRate(0) (06master...06fix_mempool_GetMinFee_bug_returning_below_minRelayTxFee) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11455
30 2017-10-10 16:46:12 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15mess110 opened pull request #11475: [rpc] mempoolinfo should take ::minRelayTxFee into account (06master...06include_minRelayTxFee_in_getmempoolinfo_rpc) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11475
31 2017-10-10 16:58:18 0|jnewbery|promag: I don't think that's a showstopper, but others may feel differently. Perhaps it can be addressed in a follow-up PR
32 2017-10-10 17:01:51 0|jonasschnelli|promag: Yes. 7061 is blocking...Its not directly related to this PR. See #11281 for an possible improvement of the rescan locking
33 2017-10-10 17:01:53 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11281 | Avoid pemanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime by jonasschnelli ÷ Pull Request #11281 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
34 2017-10-10 17:05:13 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli closed pull request #11474: Fixing pointer asterisk (06master...06TypoFix) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11474
35 2017-10-10 19:50:27 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #11476: Avoid opening copied wallet databases simultaneously (06master...06pr/wid) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11476
36 2017-10-10 21:43:49 0|meshcollider|jnewbery: do you have time to discuss some of your points in #11466? Re: moving GetWalletDir() out of utils.cpp, is there already a wallet util file you'd suggest moving it too, or I should create one?
37 2017-10-10 21:43:51 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11466 | [WIP] Specify custom wallet directory with -walletdir param by MeshCollider ÷ Pull Request #11466 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
38 2017-10-10 21:44:58 0|meshcollider|I still haven't fully thought through where to put the initial directory creation stuff, to move it out of the GetDataDir function and allow the path caching to be removed
39 2017-10-10 21:46:48 0|meshcollider|So if I made a InitDataDir() function to call just once on initialization, which would check for datadir existence and make default one if it doesn't exist, that should store the data directory path and just return it on GetDataDir()
40 2017-10-10 21:48:27 0|meshcollider|But we want to create the wallet dir on first run, so should a wallets/ directory always be created when the datadir is? Or is that still too much mixing of server + wallet stuff?
41 2017-10-10 21:49:44 0|esotericnonsense|meshcollider: I haven't looked at the code; when/where is wallet.dat opened and written for the first time? that seems like a natural point?
42 2017-10-10 21:50:00 0|esotericnonsense|(you don't need a wallets folder until you actually have something to put in it)
43 2017-10-10 21:50:45 0|esotericnonsense|argh I missed a line above gribble's. ignore
44 2017-10-10 21:50:45 0|meshcollider|esotericnonsense: the problem is that you only want to create a wallets/ folder if this is the first run, because otherwise you'll already have a wallet.dat in the datadir root which would get ignored from that point on
45 2017-10-10 21:51:22 0|meshcollider|And from what I can think, the best way to know if this is a first-run is if we are creating the datadir too
46 2017-10-10 21:59:08 0|meshcollider|Hmm perhaps it should go in wallet/init.cpp?
47 2017-10-10 22:41:43 0|meshcollider|Also wanted to discuss how best to list `available` wallets without relying on .dat extension
48 2017-10-10 22:41:51 0|meshcollider|Relying*
49 2017-10-10 22:56:46 0|promag|meshcollider: I would like some feedback here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11466#discussion_r143733780
50 2017-10-10 23:07:48 0|meshcollider|I'm personally unsure on motivation, it was just suggested by John in the comment he linked
51 2017-10-10 23:08:34 0|meshcollider|Because of the point wumpus made in the OP
52 2017-10-10 23:16:35 0|promag|let me check
53 2017-10-10 23:18:31 0|promag|wumpus point on backups?
54 2017-10-10 23:20:15 0|promag|I still don't see the point. It's not possible to create new wallets via RPC. I really think it's noise for your PR. cc @jnewbery
55 2017-10-10 23:40:22 0|meshcollider|Could be yeah, I'll see what they say ðŸâÂ