1 2017-11-06 00:38:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15astanway opened pull request #11614: ZMQ: Add decodedtx topic for JSON tx publishing (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11614
 2 2017-11-06 08:46:56	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11610: [0.15] Update release notes for 0.15.1 (060.15...06201711_releasenotes0151) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11610
 3 2017-11-06 10:30:19	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14223a4aa 15fanquake: [build] Don't fail when passed --disable-lcov and lcov isn't available
 4 2017-11-06 10:30:19	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0cc98763919a...0e707919f596
 5 2017-11-06 10:30:20	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 140e70791 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11611: [build] Don't fail when passed --disable-lcov and lcov isn't available...
 6 2017-11-06 10:30:57	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11611: [build] Don't fail when passed --disable-lcov and lcov isn't available (06master...06dontfaillcov) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11611
 7 2017-11-06 11:37:09	0|andre1|I started downloading the bitcoin core wallet since a couple of days and although I realize this might have been asked many times before I could find the answer on the web. Why does the download start in 2009 and works its way to today and not the other way round start with today and work back to 2009?
 8 2017-11-06 11:40:57	0|Sentineo|andre1: this is the core dev channel, discussions are about developement and code. Can you please repaste that question to #bitcoin? I will answer there.
 9 2017-11-06 11:41:13	0|andre1|sorry ok thanks will do
10 2017-11-06 11:41:19	0|Sentineo|no problem
11 2017-11-06 12:17:25	0|fanquake|Looks like a bit of mess to sort out with OpenSSL? Can't wait until it's gone..
12 2017-11-06 12:41:37	0|wumpus|fanquake: same sentiment here...
13 2017-11-06 12:41:57	0|wumpus|I went from mildly opposed to actively hostile toward OpenSSL
14 2017-11-06 12:42:35	0|luke-jr|what's going on with OpenSSL this time? :/
15 2017-11-06 12:43:37	0|fanquake|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11602
16 2017-11-06 12:44:52	0|luke-jr|oh, that
17 2017-11-06 12:46:48	0|wumpus|another random non-backward-compatible API change - and this one is pretty dangerous, a fix for newer versions would actively break threading support with older versions
18 2017-11-06 12:47:29	0|wumpus|this is a really bad place to be in with a critical library
19 2017-11-06 12:48:29	0|luke-jr|yes, just I've gotten used to complaints of OpenSSL indicating a critical security problem XD
20 2017-11-06 12:50:08	0|Sentineo|I heard openssl will be abandoned fully, right?
21 2017-11-06 12:50:10	0|wumpus|at least happy we link openssl statically
22 2017-11-06 12:50:11	0|Sentineo|I mean in core
23 2017-11-06 12:50:42	0|wumpus|we need it in the GUI, but for the rest it should be ditched completely yes
24 2017-11-06 12:51:02	0|wumpus|pretty far along already
25 2017-11-06 12:52:08	0|wumpus|IIRC it's only randomness that's left used for, and maybe some tests
26 2017-11-06 12:58:08	0|Sentineo|cool
27 2017-11-06 12:58:30	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15vivganes opened pull request #11619: Docs: Replace project with product in README (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11619
28 2017-11-06 14:34:55	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake opened pull request #11621: [build] Add temp_bitcoin_locale_qrc to CLEANFILES to fix make distcheck (06master...06fix-osx-distcheck) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11621
29 2017-11-06 15:05:29	0|BlueMatt|wumpus: re: openssl can we just remove the payment protocol garbage?
30 2017-11-06 15:05:37	0|BlueMatt|I mean at least rip out the cert-checking part of it
31 2017-11-06 15:05:53	0|BlueMatt|its nonsense, and almost certainly provides a sense of security that it simply doesnt provide
32 2017-11-06 15:21:43	0|wumpus|BlueMatt: even if you do that you still can't get rid of openssl, as qt needs that for https
33 2017-11-06 15:22:17	0|wumpus|BlueMatt: anyhow as soon as we don't use SSL anymore in core code, we can leave its initialization to qt
34 2017-11-06 15:22:20	0|name|what does the GUI use https fpr?
35 2017-11-06 15:22:25	0|name|*for
36 2017-11-06 15:22:35	0|wumpus|name: for retrieving payment protocol URLs
37 2017-11-06 15:23:18	0|wumpus|you'd really have to remove the entire payment protocol, and I'm not sure that's a good idea, at least announce its deprecation far in advance
38 2017-11-06 15:24:00	0|BlueMatt|wumpus: ugh i forgot it fetches the descriptors
39 2017-11-06 15:24:02	0|BlueMatt|man, fuck that thing
40 2017-11-06 15:24:36	0|name|This is the BIP70 stuff?
41 2017-11-06 15:24:44	0|wumpus|name: yes
42 2017-11-06 15:25:35	0|wumpus|as preparation for (future or far future) deprecation we could add a compile option to build without BIP70 support
43 2017-11-06 15:25:53	0|name|I wonder how much real-world usage the payment protocol feature has
44 2017-11-06 15:26:16	0|wumpus|I've seen only bitpay use it, with android wallet
45 2017-11-06 15:26:41	0|wumpus|that might be all real-world usage of it, in which case removing it from bitcoin core wouldn't affect anyone :)
46 2017-11-06 15:27:12	0|name|someone always complains :)
47 2017-11-06 15:28:43	0|wumpus|very true
48 2017-11-06 15:42:38	0|StopAndDecrypt|https://pastebin.com/aXz3HsV1
49 2017-11-06 15:42:56	0|StopAndDecrypt|i have 4 good peers but the new ones keep cycling out
50 2017-11-06 15:43:16	0|StopAndDecrypt|anyone more experience able to touch on what this might be indicative of?
51 2017-11-06 15:43:39	0|StopAndDecrypt|im running 0.15
52 2017-11-06 15:57:02	0|kinlo|I did always like the payment protocol idea, it's usefull on bitpay and there are more wallets that support it, I'm using it on bread....
53 2017-11-06 15:59:58	0|StopAndDecrypt|to clarify, all the new peers have no user agent name or details
54 2017-11-06 16:01:21	0|wumpus|kinlo: I like the idea as well, the problem is with the implementation
55 2017-11-06 16:01:24	0|StopAndDecrypt|oh  im in the wrong channel, apologies
56 2017-11-06 16:02:18	0|wumpus|StopAndDecrypt: it's quite normal that some peers only connect shortly, doesn't need to be indicative of anything
57 2017-11-06 16:03:07	0|kinlo|I can't talk about the implementation, haven't read it, but even if the core wallet would remove it from it's implementation, I think the standard shouldn't be deprecated
58 2017-11-06 16:03:22	0|wumpus|kinlo: the foremost thing I like about payment request is that they have expiration dates, and the user never sees the address used, so it's possible for vendors to rotate keys and not worry too much about receiving payments on old addresses
59 2017-11-06 16:05:08	0|kinlo|wumpus: I've discussed this with gavin when the protocol was designed, I like that too but I think it is a missed oportunity to supply a refund address from the client so merchants could refund easily.  But I guess that's a discussion we shouldn't be having here and now
60 2017-11-06 16:05:34	0|wumpus|kinlo: how do you mean? an optional refund addres is also part of it
61 2017-11-06 16:05:36	0|StopAndDecrypt|wumpus, it got all the way up to 160, and now i have 8 that arent disconnecting, but thanks
62 2017-11-06 16:05:53	0|wumpus|kinlo: which is also a great idea
63 2017-11-06 16:06:12	0|kinlo|wumpus: it is?  then ignore me, I'll have to reread the final specs, maybe my comments at the time might have made the final specs :)
64 2017-11-06 16:08:32	0|wumpus|kinlo: so what I hate about it: - google protocol buffers - use of PKI certificate chains (lots of overhead in implementing this, especially on embedded hw) - needs fetching data over the web which pretty much mandates SSL in the wallet
65 2017-11-06 16:09:09	0|wumpus|kinlo: yeah you probably just missed that part. I don't blame you.
66 2017-11-06 16:11:52	0|kinlo|yeah, pki sucks but what's the alternative :)
67 2017-11-06 16:21:19	0|wumpus|again, I think the *idea* is great, of making it possible for the (hw) wallet to authenticate the vendor
68 2017-11-06 16:23:18	0|sipa|my main concern with the payment protocol is that is has no guaranteed message delivery
69 2017-11-06 16:23:31	0|sipa|the tx creator is allowed to just broadcast the tx
70 2017-11-06 16:24:02	0|sipa|if it were required to just send the sign tx back to the merchant, it would guarantee reception
71 2017-11-06 16:26:12	0|wumpus|yes, although it supports sending the tx directly to the merchant, it's not required
72 2017-11-06 17:28:54	0|ccc|fuckfuck
73 2017-11-06 17:28:59	0|ccc|everyone is a fucker?
74 2017-11-06 17:29:13	0|ccc|i hear giszmo is a fucker
75 2017-11-06 17:48:31	0|BlueMatt|#11524 could use a quick review-and-merge..
76 2017-11-06 17:48:32	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11524 | [net] De-duplicate connection eviction logic by tjps · Pull Request #11524 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
77 2017-11-06 17:49:48	0|BlueMatt|jonasschnelli: can you take another look at 3716? I initially came to the same conclusion as you, but then changed my mind cause I was missing some context
78 2017-11-06 17:50:01	0|BlueMatt|and it is the longest-still-open-pr by a pretty large margin :/
79 2017-11-06 17:50:06	0|sipa|#3716
80 2017-11-06 17:50:08	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3716 | GUI: Receive: Remove option to reuse a previous address by luke-jr · Pull Request #3716 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
81 2017-11-06 18:17:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #11622: build: Add --disable-bip70 configure option (06master...062017_11_bip70_disable) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11622
82 2017-11-06 20:25:23	0|achow101|what does libsecp use openssl for? (I just grepped for openssl and a bunch of things in secp showed up)
83 2017-11-06 20:25:33	0|sipa|tests
84 2017-11-06 20:25:40	0|sipa|it compares things with openssl, if available
85 2017-11-06 20:26:17	0|achow101|ah ok
86 2017-11-06 20:28:05	0|sipa|a long long time ago, libsecp256k1 relied on openssl's bignum library
87 2017-11-06 20:28:34	0|sipa|(which was btw how we discovered the BN_sqr bug in OpenSSL)
88 2017-11-06 20:33:33	0|gmaxwell|achow101: the dependency is tests only and completely optional.