1 2017-10-13 01:00:42	0|btcdrak|Twitter have verified the @bitcoincoreorg twitter account, which now displays the verified checkmark https://twitter.com/bitcoincoreorg/status/918638354069164032
  2 2017-10-13 01:01:55	0|btcdrak|Twitter reached out shortly after taking down the impersonator account down. They apparently have done their research and were well aware of the situation.
  3 2017-10-13 01:02:49	0|esotericnonsense|\o/
  4 2017-10-13 01:08:16	0|sipa|btcdrak: cool, thanks!
  5 2017-10-13 01:17:45	0|meshcollider|btcdrak: good news :)
  6 2017-10-13 01:18:49	0|grubles|nice
  7 2017-10-13 01:54:07	0|Emcy|nice
  8 2017-10-13 05:40:29	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15cherouvim opened pull request #11493: ultra trivial typo fix in docs (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11493
  9 2017-10-13 06:15:25	0|maaku|style question: when making something like an STL container, should I still adhere to the bitcoin style guide (e.g. CamelCase methods)?
 10 2017-10-13 06:18:04	0|sipa|at least for two examples of those (limitedmap and prevector), we follow STL naming conventions, but that's mostly because these are actually drop-in replacements
 11 2017-10-13 06:36:47	0|Guest76632|hi
 12 2017-10-13 06:37:14	0|Guest76632|How can I make a request to update the list of exchanges on bitcoin.org?
 13 2017-10-13 06:38:00	0|sipa|https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues
 14 2017-10-13 07:12:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ajtowns opened pull request #11494: Clarify BIP9 behaviour when nTimeout <= 0 (06master...06vb_0_timeout) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11494
 15 2017-10-13 08:55:16	0|meshcollider|are any of the travis builds  big endian
 16 2017-10-13 09:29:29	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #11493: ultra trivial typo fix in docs (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11493
 17 2017-10-13 13:13:11	0|pbase|hi i am currently syncing the core wallet which is pruned. Can i copy paste the entire downloaded data for a second wallet on a different computer (local). basically what i want to do is to save time in syncing the data on the second computer
 18 2017-10-13 13:55:16	0|sdaftuar|;;diff
 19 2017-10-13 13:55:17	0|gribble|1.123863285132E12
 20 2017-10-13 13:58:16	0|timothy|pbase: yes
 21 2017-10-13 13:58:52	0|pbase|timothy, just delete the wallet.dat on the new computer?
 22 2017-10-13 13:59:00	0|pbase|second computer*
 23 2017-10-13 15:33:01	0|promag|ryanofsky: care to review? ty!
 24 2017-10-13 15:56:34	0|CubicEarth|jonasschnelli: You here?
 25 2017-10-13 16:13:16	0|jnewbery|sipa: what do you think of https://github.com/jnewbery/bitcoin/tree/pr11389.2 ? It's your original approach for #11389 rebased on a commit to pin P2SH to a block height. That seems more palatable than pretending P2SH is a VB deployment.
 26 2017-10-13 16:13:18	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11389 | Support having SegWit always active in regtest by sipa · Pull Request #11389 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 27 2017-10-13 16:20:04	0|sipa|jnewbery: hmm, that's all that is needed?
 28 2017-10-13 16:21:23	0|sdaftuar|jnewbery's branch looks correct to me (and simpler)
 29 2017-10-13 16:27:50	0|jnewbery|sipa: I believe so - I think the behaviour is equivalent to your change that uses version bits
 30 2017-10-13 16:28:03	0|jnewbery|obviously needs thorough review though
 31 2017-10-13 16:28:08	0|sipa|jnewbery: but not configurable
 32 2017-10-13 16:28:22	0|sipa|i needed to at least modify one unit test
 33 2017-10-13 16:29:34	0|jnewbery|sipa: ah yes, you're right
 34 2017-10-13 16:37:28	0|jnewbery|the failing test in miner_tests.cpp is testing that template creation fails when including a P2SH output. I think we can just remove it
 35 2017-10-13 16:51:11	0|sipa|jnewbery: fair
 36 2017-10-13 17:39:37	0|sdaftuar|is there a reason we should not set fAddnode=true for -connect peers?
 37 2017-10-13 17:40:09	0|sdaftuar|(asking because i am treating addnode peers specially for things like #11490, and it seems like -connect peers should get the same treatment)
 38 2017-10-13 17:40:11	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11490 | Disconnect from outbound peers with bad headers chains by sdaftuar · Pull Request #11490 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 39 2017-10-13 17:44:48	0|sipa|sdaftuar: when using -connect, the normal connection-creation loop doesm't even run, so i guess that for most things it doesn't matter
 40 2017-10-13 17:45:07	0|sipa|but if it does for 11490, it should probably be changed
 41 2017-10-13 17:46:02	0|gmaxwell|sdaftuar:  think it would be fine to addnode.
 42 2017-10-13 17:46:09	0|sdaftuar|ok i'll throw a commit in that sets fAddnode, and if someone comes up with a reason to use a new bool I can switch
 43 2017-10-13 17:46:12	0|sdaftuar|gmaxwell: thanks
 44 2017-10-13 18:38:40	0|jnewbery|sipa: it was a bit more complicated than I thought. The miner_test was testing that having an invalid P2SH tx in the mempool would cause template creation to fail. Currently, P2SH is always enabled in the unit tests (because it's activated using system time). Pinning the activation height of P2SH means that P2SH is not active so the test was failing.
 45 2017-10-13 18:39:17	0|jnewbery|Rearranging the ordering of the tests so that the P2SH test only happens after height 210,000 appears to be sufficient to fix it
 46 2017-10-13 18:41:07	0|sipa|cool!
 47 2017-10-13 18:41:11	0|sipa|have a branch?
 48 2017-10-13 18:41:58	0|jnewbery|same branch. Final commit fixes the test
 49 2017-10-13 19:25:47	0|cfields|sdaftuar: fyi #11456 adds that
 50 2017-10-13 19:25:49	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11456 | Replace relevant services logic with a function suite. by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #11456 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 51 2017-10-13 19:26:06	0|sdaftuar|ah, haven't reviewed it yet, thanks
 52 2017-10-13 19:26:22	0|cfields|np
 53 2017-10-13 19:27:09	0|BlueMatt|sdaftuar: oh, i thought i mentioned to you i had a pr that changed the definition of fAddnode - I'd recommend you just pull that commit into your pr
 54 2017-10-13 19:27:51	0|sdaftuar|i thought i remember you saying that we should treat connect peers the same as addnode peers, but didn't remember exactly what that entailed.  cool, will do
 55 2017-10-13 19:34:32	0|cfields|make sure to take the next one that renames too, to avoid colliding when rebasing
 56 2017-10-13 19:45:59	0|gmaxwell|sdaftuar: re your excemption of addnoded peers, I think thats right for now but perhaps not what we want long term.. consider the case where you've configured 20 addnode peers... 8 are connected (per the limits).  Two of the eight are forked nodes... you'd probably prefer to drop them and try to replace them with some of your additional configured options.
 57 2017-10-13 19:46:48	0|gmaxwell|so I think the longer term test should be "are my outbound connections of this type full, if not, don't disconnect anything from that type"
 58 2017-10-13 19:46:50	0|sdaftuar|gmaxwell: i thought addnode peers are in addition to our 8 outbound peers nowadays, did i misunderstand?
 59 2017-10-13 19:47:11	0|gmaxwell|yes, there are 8 additional addnode peers.
 60 2017-10-13 19:47:15	0|sdaftuar|oh i see
 61 2017-10-13 19:47:24	0|gmaxwell|(keeps people out of ignorance from addnoding the whole network to their detriment)
 62 2017-10-13 19:48:10	0|gmaxwell|and in the above the definition of full also means "more to try are available"
 63 2017-10-13 19:48:25	0|gmaxwell|if you have 8 or fewer addnodes configured you should never disconnect one.
 64 2017-10-13 19:48:48	0|gmaxwell|in any case, I don't think we need to be smarter now.
 65 2017-10-13 19:49:13	0|sdaftuar|i'm struggling a little to come up with an outbound peer evicter that kicks in when we haven't advanced our tip in a long time
 66 2017-10-13 19:49:18	0|sdaftuar|it seems like that logic wants to live in net.cpp
 67 2017-10-13 19:49:40	0|sipa|sdaftuar: net shouldn't know about a 'tip'
 68 2017-10-13 19:50:05	0|sdaftuar|yeah i know... i think net_processing would fill in information, but net is the best place to look at your set of peers, i think?
 69 2017-10-13 19:50:12	0|sdaftuar|like we do for inbound peer eviction
 70 2017-10-13 19:50:26	0|sipa|right, it's a bit fuzzy for now
 71 2017-10-13 19:53:55	0|cfields|sdaftuar: that set of peers is moving out, but it's not clear how we're going to accomplish that
 72 2017-10-13 19:54:51	0|sipa|sdaftuar: i think eventually all the information that we'd use to determine who to evict will live in net_processing, apart perhaps from connection uptime (which it could easily query net for)
 73 2017-10-13 19:55:05	0|cfields|sdaftuar: ideally, PeerLogicValidation (needs rename) holds a vector of CNodeState. But there are lots of locking issues to get through before we get there :(
 74 2017-10-13 19:55:39	0|cfields|(the idea being that if you want to do something for each peer, you look there, rather than the CNodes in net)
 75 2017-10-13 19:56:02	0|cfields|yes, what sipa said too
 76 2017-10-13 19:56:19	0|sdaftuar|the thing i'm trying to do now is look at my set of outbound peers, pick the worst of them under some metric, and disconnect it -- but only if i'm full and am using up all my outbound slots
 77 2017-10-13 19:56:31	0|sdaftuar|it doesn't seem easy to determine the last thing from net_processing
 78 2017-10-13 19:56:43	0|sdaftuar|but the metric uses data that only net_processing knows
 79 2017-10-13 19:57:46	0|cfields|sdaftuar: you can use a ForEachNode. That was kinda meant to be a stop-gap for stuff like this until it's all moved out.
 80 2017-10-13 19:57:58	0|BlueMatt|sdaftuar: I think in that case you should prefer to add new state to CNodeState/net_processing.cpp static
 81 2017-10-13 19:58:11	0|BlueMatt|(net_processing.cpp static will probably all eventually move into PeerLogicValidation as it gets renamed)
 82 2017-10-13 19:58:59	0|sdaftuar|i think i need to expose ConnMan's nMaxOutbound in order to do this outside of net -- does that seem ok?
 83 2017-10-13 19:59:28	0|BlueMatt|why is that not a #define anymore :(
 84 2017-10-13 20:00:59	0|cfields|so that we can test changes exactly like this one :)
 85 2017-10-13 20:15:04	0|cfields|sdaftuar: how about testing each node and marking exactly 1 at a time as preferred for eviction? Then the connection loop can check for !outgoing_full || outgoing_full-1 && have_evictable ?
 86 2017-10-13 20:16:12	0|cfields|er, that logic's all busted but you get the point :)
 87 2017-10-13 20:16:41	0|sdaftuar|ah, i think i like that
 88 2017-10-13 20:16:51	0|sdaftuar|thanks, i'll give that a try!
 89 2017-10-13 20:16:57	0|cfields|np
 90 2017-10-13 21:30:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #11495: [trivial] Make namespace explicit for is_regular_file (06master...06explicit_is_regular_file) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11495
 91 2017-10-13 22:23:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/424be0330514...8c2de827e988
 92 2017-10-13 22:23:48	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 147a91ceb 15Jonas Schnelli: [QA] Add RPC based rescan test
 93 2017-10-13 22:23:48	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14c77170f 15Jonas Schnelli: [Wallet] add rescanblockchain <start_height> <stop_height> RPC command
 94 2017-10-13 22:23:49	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 148c2de82 15Jonas Schnelli: Merge #7061: [Wallet] Add RPC call "rescanblockchain <startheight> <stopheight>"...
 95 2017-10-13 22:25:36	0|meshcollider|\o?
 96 2017-10-13 22:25:43	0|meshcollider|\o/ * lol
 97 2017-10-13 22:27:27	0|promag|\o/
 98 2017-10-13 22:30:39	0|jonasschnelli|[15:25:33]  <meshcollider>	\o?   <--- do you have a pirate hook arm?
 99 2017-10-13 22:31:09	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: lol
100 2017-10-13 22:31:29	0|sipa|\orrrrrr
101 2017-10-13 22:31:45	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa pushed 5 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8c2de827e988...326a5652e0d2
102 2017-10-13 22:31:46	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 144440710 15Matt Corallo: Replace relevant services logic with a function suite....
103 2017-10-13 22:31:46	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1457edc0b 15Matt Corallo: Rename fAddnode to a more-descriptive "manual_connection"
104 2017-10-13 22:31:47	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 145ee88b4 15Matt Corallo: Clarify docs for requirements/handling of addnode/connect nodes
105 2017-10-13 22:32:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa closed pull request #11456: Replace relevant services logic with a function suite. (06master...062017-09-service-flags-cleanups) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11456
106 2017-10-13 22:32:22	0|BlueMatt|\o/
107 2017-10-13 22:33:38	0|meshcollider|jonasschnelli: lol yep that's it ;)
108 2017-10-13 22:34:19	0|jonasschnelli|Great,... 11456 is also merged.. time to review it. :)
109 2017-10-13 22:35:08	0|jonasschnelli|BlueMatt: I guess https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoin/commit/2017-09-service-flags-cleanups is now outdated for the NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED PR?
110 2017-10-13 22:37:48	0|BlueMatt|hmm?
111 2017-10-13 22:37:57	0|promag|mergefest? there you go #11006
112 2017-10-13 22:37:59	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11006 | Improve shutdown process by promag · Pull Request #11006 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
113 2017-10-13 22:38:54	0|jonasschnelli|BlueMatt: is your comment (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10387#issuecomment-334490761) still relevant after a rebase with #v
114 2017-10-13 22:38:57	0|jonasschnelli|#11456
115 2017-10-13 22:38:59	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11456 | Replace relevant services logic with a function suite. by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #11456 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
116 2017-10-13 22:39:21	0|jonasschnelli|promag, 11006 needs some acks first
117 2017-10-13 22:39:29	0|promag|oh :(
118 2017-10-13 22:40:27	0|BlueMatt|jonasschnelli: no?
119 2017-10-13 22:40:33	0|BlueMatt|thats the same branch that made the pr and got merged
120 2017-10-13 22:40:40	0|BlueMatt|so...I mean yes, but equally valid if you rebase on master?
121 2017-10-13 22:41:02	0|jonasschnelli|Okay... haven't checked... just arrived back in civilisation. Will take a closer look
122 2017-10-13 23:38:01	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MeshCollider opened pull request #11496: [Trivial] Add missing comma from rescanblockchain example (06master...06201710_missing_comma) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11496