1 2018-01-18 00:48:32	0|promag|feeling alone here
  2 2018-01-18 00:49:34	0|promag|#12153 is also sad
  3 2018-01-18 00:49:35	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12153 | Avoid permanent cs_main lock in getblockheader by promag · Pull Request #12153 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
  4 2018-01-18 03:47:03	0|kallewoof|meshcollider: ah, good point. I forgot about it. will reopen #11489
  5 2018-01-18 03:47:04	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11489 | [wallet] sendtoaddress style argument by kallewoof · Pull Request #11489 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
  6 2018-01-18 03:47:53	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15kallewoof reopened pull request #11489: [wallet] sendtoaddress style argument (06master...06201709_segwitwallet2_sendtoaddress) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11489
  7 2018-01-18 04:00:33	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15achavala opened pull request #12214: added app files (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12214
  8 2018-01-18 04:00:57	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15achavala closed pull request #12214: added app files (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12214
  9 2018-01-18 04:19:30	0|jimpo|Can I get some review on #11857?
 10 2018-01-18 04:19:33	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11857 | Build tx index in parallel with validation by jimpo · Pull Request #11857 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 11 2018-01-18 09:55:50	0|kallewoof|A full node of mine is banning peers left and right and I'm seeing a ton of "ERROR: non-continuous headers sequence". Running master, switching to 0.15 to see if it goes away.
 12 2018-01-18 10:04:18	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14cdf3e03 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: wallet: Deprecate addwitnessaddress...
 13 2018-01-18 10:04:18	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c7978be89964...17180fa60810
 14 2018-01-18 10:04:19	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1417180fa 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12210: wallet: Deprecate addwitnessaddress...
 15 2018-01-18 10:05:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #12210: wallet: Deprecate addwitnessaddress (06master...062018_01_deprecate_addwitnessaddress) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12210
 16 2018-01-18 10:14:07	0|wumpus|kallewoof: weird! I've never seen that error
 17 2018-01-18 10:17:57	0|sdaftuar|kallewoof: if you have debug logs you can post somewhere, i'd be interested in investigating
 18 2018-01-18 10:18:54	0|sdaftuar|wumpus: kallewoof: i think i've seen it before with clock issues and the 2 hour rule on testnet, but don't think i've ever seen it on mainnet
 19 2018-01-18 13:37:36	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15Sjors opened pull request #12216: scripted-diff: prefix [address|change]type parameters with 'default' (06master...062018/01/defaultaddresstype) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12216
 20 2018-01-18 13:40:33	0|provoostenator|^ I'm lazily relying on Travs to check the scripted diff, because it uses sed in an OSX / BSD unfriendly way.
 21 2018-01-18 13:41:49	0|provoostenator|Oh great, OSX requires sed -i '' 's/changetype/defaultchangetype/g' whereas linux doesn't allow that.
 22 2018-01-18 13:43:19	0|wumpus|isn't that the other way around? I'm fairly sure linux has sed -i but various BSDs have not
 23 2018-01-18 13:46:10	0|provoostenator|OSX requires an empty string as the first argument.
 24 2018-01-18 13:46:32	0|provoostenator|(before the actual /s)
 25 2018-01-18 14:02:21	0|wumpus|but yes writing portable shellscript is frustrating, remebering the many ways we have to use to do a basic thing like sha256 verification in the bdb install script
 26 2018-01-18 14:06:06	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fa1e69e 15MarcoFalke: qa: Sync with validationinterface queue in sync_mempools
 27 2018-01-18 14:06:06	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/17180fa60810...898f560b55ab
 28 2018-01-18 14:06:07	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14898f560 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12206: qa: Sync with validationinterface queue in sync_mempools...
 29 2018-01-18 14:06:56	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #12206: qa: Sync with validationinterface queue in sync_mempools (06master...06Mf1801-qaWalletMempoolAsync) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12206
 30 2018-01-18 14:07:59	0|Tport|hello
 31 2018-01-18 14:56:05	0|Tport|where are API of bitcoin network?
 32 2018-01-18 15:03:00	0|wumpus|test 97 of p2p-fullblocktest.py is consistently failing here, weird
 33 2018-01-18 15:05:07	0|gmaxwell|I feel dejavu at that.
 34 2018-01-18 15:06:56	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #12217: qa: Add missing syncwithvalidationinterfacequeue to tests (06master...06Mf1801-qaWalletMempoolAsyncTake2) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12217
 35 2018-01-18 15:09:48	0|Tport|is anyone can send me 0.001 btc to test?
 36 2018-01-18 15:10:41	0|Tport|0.005 sorry
 37 2018-01-18 15:10:44	0|wumpus|Tport: testnet?
 38 2018-01-18 15:11:04	0|Tport|no, real
 39 2018-01-18 15:11:08	0|wumpus|go away, no begging here
 40 2018-01-18 15:14:24	0|Tport|i'am developing crypto stock exchange, i need to able to send blocks to differents puls, what is the right way?
 41 2018-01-18 15:14:58	0|wumpus|take it to #bitcoin please
 42 2018-01-18 15:15:22	0|Tport|#bitcoin channel ?
 43 2018-01-18 15:15:59	0|wumpus|yes
 44 2018-01-18 15:16:57	0|wumpus|hrm on another host, p2p-fullblocktest.py works fine
 45 2018-01-18 15:20:57	0|MarcoFalke|ups. My znc shut down and I lost the backscroll of last week or so.
 46 2018-01-18 15:21:16	0|wumpus|I'll pastebin it
 47 2018-01-18 15:21:25	0|MarcoFalke|wumpus: I will use botbot
 48 2018-01-18 15:21:30	0|MarcoFalke|.me
 49 2018-01-18 15:22:24	0|wumpus|ok
 50 2018-01-18 15:22:50	0|MarcoFalke|I was wondering if syncwithvalidationinterfacequeue should be a not-hidden rpc. I could imagine some user does this:
 51 2018-01-18 15:23:17	0|MarcoFalke|wallet.listunspent(); create and sign raw tx; sendrawtx; wallet.some_rpc_that_is_not_in_sync
 52 2018-01-18 15:23:19	0|MarcoFalke|()
 53 2018-01-18 15:23:55	0|wumpus|maybe, but not for 0.16, I'm not convinced having to explicitly call a sync call is a good idea for end users
 54 2018-01-18 15:24:37	0|wumpus|seems to have a lot of foot-shooting potential, it's fine for fixing intermittent test failures for now, but I don't like it much as API
 55 2018-01-18 15:25:26	0|MarcoFalke|Then, maybe sendraw should do that internally
 56 2018-01-18 15:28:24	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: it does
 57 2018-01-18 15:28:51	0|MarcoFalke|oh, then it is fine, I think.
 58 2018-01-18 15:29:34	0|wumpus|it doesn't call SyncWithValidationInterfaceQueue, but does the same thing manually
 59 2018-01-18 15:31:35	0|wumpus|(not sure why it doesn't just use that call)
 60 2018-01-18 15:36:29	0|kallewoof|wumpus: for some reason my debug.log is empty, but i have a screen with -printtoconsole.
 61 2018-01-18 15:37:07	0|wumpus|printtoconsole doesn't write to debug.log
 62 2018-01-18 15:39:21	0|wumpus|kallewoof: please use a pastebin for lots of text, don't paste all of that into my PM
 63 2018-01-18 15:39:54	0|wumpus|it keeps putting up notifications here now :/
 64 2018-01-18 15:40:20	0|kallewoof|Sorry!
 65 2018-01-18 15:59:49	0|wumpus|master doesn't log version messages anymore for newly connected nodes?
 66 2018-01-18 16:00:50	0|wumpus|that's kind of annoying, trying to correlate MISBEHAVING peer=X to connections, but they're not logged anymore
 67 2018-01-18 16:00:56	0|wumpus|when did this change?
 68 2018-01-18 16:01:30	0|gmaxwell|FWIW, misbehaving, there are a lot of "bitcoin gold" nodes causing misbehaving messages.
 69 2018-01-18 16:02:04	0|wumpus|is that possibly the "ERROR: non-continuous headers sequence"?
 70 2018-01-18 16:02:23	0|gmaxwell|Yes.
 71 2018-01-18 16:02:25	0|gmaxwell|Thats it.
 72 2018-01-18 16:02:54	0|wumpus|kallewoof: ^^
 73 2018-01-18 16:02:59	0|gmaxwell|I dunno about the logging change, I don't recall it changing but I do recall discussing it.
 74 2018-01-18 16:03:31	0|wumpus|should also stop logging MISBEHAVING and other network things then
 75 2018-01-18 16:03:40	0|gmaxwell|(The reason to not log it is because logging any text from third parties is a potential attack, nussance spam vector.)
 76 2018-01-18 16:03:56	0|wumpus|it makes no sense to log those, with peer numbers, without being able to correlate them
 77 2018-01-18 16:04:01	0|gmaxwell|if they're still connected you can go look at the peer info.
 78 2018-01-18 16:04:09	0|wumpus|no this is for post-mortem analysis
 79 2018-01-18 16:04:13	0|wumpus|I've banned them long time ago
 80 2018-01-18 16:04:19	0|wumpus|(automatically)
 81 2018-01-18 16:04:38	0|wumpus|well this is also a nuisance vector like this :(
 82 2018-01-18 16:04:47	0|gmaxwell|right but the misbehaving log entries still happen before the banning.
 83 2018-01-18 16:05:23	0|gmaxwell|There were some incidents in the past with people connecting in a tight loop with their version strings set to webservices addresses and what not....  but I still don't remember the behavior changing.
 84 2018-01-18 16:06:14	0|wumpus|ok I understand that change then, but then these should also move to ::NET category
 85 2018-01-18 16:06:32	0|wumpus|right now the log shows this:
 86 2018-01-18 16:06:33	0|wumpus|2018-01-18 16:02:27 ERROR: non-continuous headers sequence
 87 2018-01-18 16:06:33	0|wumpus|2018-01-18 16:02:27 Misbehaving: 31.146.129.229:62174 peer=164603 (80 -> 100) BAN THRESHOLD EXCEEDED
 88 2018-01-18 16:06:40	0|wumpus|that seems like a local error
 89 2018-01-18 16:07:04	0|gmaxwell|yes, thats ... not optimal.
 90 2018-01-18 16:08:59	0|wumpus|maybe Misbehaving() should take a message so that it can at leaswt be logged on the same line
 91 2018-01-18 16:09:38	0|adiabat|I get lots of that kind of thing in the log; non-continuous headers sequence, also bad-diffbits, incorrect proof of work (code 16)
 92 2018-01-18 16:10:16	0|adiabat|the latter seems to be from "/WorldBitcoin:0.16.1/"... whatever that is
 93 2018-01-18 16:20:48	0|sdaftuar|gmaxwell: i got around to doing a little investigation, looks like there was some sigops attack stuff happening back in november 2015, and i appear to have data from back then
 94 2018-01-18 16:21:35	0|sdaftuar|so presumably i should have a way to simulate and evaluate alternate options if you have something to try
 95 2018-01-18 16:26:53	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #12218: net: Move misbehaving logging to net logging category (06master...062018_01_misbehaving_logging) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12218
 96 2018-01-18 16:41:02	0|wumpus|argh, running with debug=net gives me way too much logging output, I wish there was a low-traffic net category
 97 2018-01-18 16:41:22	0|wumpus|which just logs the stuff that used to be logged unconditionally
 98 2018-01-18 16:42:15	0|wumpus|I don't want every single message or requested transaction :/
 99 2018-01-18 16:44:00	0|jnewbery|in general, log levels would be nice, and the ability to set different levels for different catagories (rather than just on/off)
100 2018-01-18 16:44:21	0|wumpus|yeah...
101 2018-01-18 16:54:33	0|wumpus|this really makes net logging unusable for me :/
102 2018-01-18 16:54:47	0|wumpus|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12219
103 2018-01-18 17:00:16	0|jnewbery|wumpus, for your failing p2p-fullblocktest: running master? running with --enable-debug? Which line in p2p-fullblocktest is failing (you should have an INFO log like 2017-12-12 12:46:23.112000 TestFramework.comptool (INFO): Running test 99: test/functional/p2p-fullblocktest.py line 1283
104 2018-01-18 17:05:39	0|wumpus|hm I don't actually know if I'm running with --enable-debug
105 2018-01-18 17:06:11	0|wumpus|let me try with #12197 :)
106 2018-01-18 17:06:13	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12197 | Log debug build status and warn when running benchmarks by laanwj · Pull Request #12197 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
107 2018-01-18 17:07:01	0|instagibbs|almost #bitcoin but not quite: in master is there any way to back out legacy addresses from (p2sh)-p2wpkh addresses from -cli or elsewhere?
108 2018-01-18 17:07:20	0|wumpus|(I did enable debug to test that, it might still be on, that'd explain something!)
109 2018-01-18 17:07:26	0|instagibbs|aside from self-computing using pubkey of course :)
110 2018-01-18 17:08:40	0|wumpus|jnewbery: yep, I'm running debug build, will try to rebuild in release mode
111 2018-01-18 17:08:53	0|wumpus|instagibbs: I don't know
112 2018-01-18 17:09:55	0|wumpus|but let me check first what line the error happens
113 2018-01-18 17:14:10	0|wumpus|"OSError: [Errno 28] No space left on device" oops
114 2018-01-18 17:15:28	0|wumpus|hehe /tmp was 30GB, lots of abandoned test files after failed tests
115 2018-01-18 17:28:53	0|provoostenator|Can we get binaries for Ubuntu 18.04 bionic?
116 2018-01-18 17:39:32	0|wumpus|provoostenator: I don't understand what you mean
117 2018-01-18 17:40:50	0|wumpus|it's possible to download pre-release ubuntu images here https://cloud-images.ubuntu.com/bionic/current/ though I'm not sure how well and if they work
118 2018-01-18 17:41:16	0|provoostenator|On the nightly Ubuntu 18.04 build `sudo add-apt-repository ppa:bitcoin/bitcoin && sudo apt-get update` complains:
119 2018-01-18 17:42:03	0|provoostenator|The repository '..... bionic Release' does not have Release file. Updating from such a repoisotry can't be done surecurity,
120 2018-01-18 17:42:14	0|provoostenator|(sorry, can't get copy-paste to work on VirtualBox)
121 2018-01-18 17:42:25	0|wumpus|well it's not released yet so I'd expect some bugs
122 2018-01-18 17:42:52	0|wumpus|the mirrors likely don't have packages for it yet
123 2018-01-18 17:43:11	0|provoostenator|Ok, so that's not an incantation we need to do, but something the Ubuntu folks need to fix?
124 2018-01-18 17:43:57	0|provoostenator|Also, who is "so"?
125 2018-01-18 17:47:03	0|wumpus|seems some of the ppas have bionic packages so I guess it's something that needs to be enabled
126 2018-01-18 18:39:22	0|wumpus|jnewbery: you were right, building in release mode made the problem go away
127 2018-01-18 18:39:40	0|wumpus|interesting
128 2018-01-18 18:45:11	0|jnewbery|p2p-fullblock has a huge re-org at the end. Running in debug can make the test time out waiting for that re-org. #11632
129 2018-01-18 18:45:13	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11632 | p2p-fullblocktest.py fails occasionally · Issue #11632 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
130 2018-01-18 18:45:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #12220: RFC: Error if relative -walletdir is specified (06master...06pr/wdabs) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12220
131 2018-01-18 19:00:43	0|wumpus|meeting time?
132 2018-01-18 19:00:44	0|sipa|meetung?
133 2018-01-18 19:00:46	0|lightningbot|Meeting started Thu Jan 18 19:00:46 2018 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
134 2018-01-18 19:00:46	0|lightningbot|Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
135 2018-01-18 19:00:46	0|wumpus|#startmeeting
136 2018-01-18 19:00:51	0|meshcollider|Hi
137 2018-01-18 19:00:55	0|sipa|Hi
138 2018-01-18 19:00:59	0|gmaxwell|HI
139 2018-01-18 19:01:00	0|wumpus|#bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator
140 2018-01-18 19:01:04	0|achow101|hi
141 2018-01-18 19:01:04	0|jonasschnelli|hi
142 2018-01-18 19:01:44	0|jnewbery|hi
143 2018-01-18 19:01:48	0|MarcoFalke|action release segwit wallet?
144 2018-01-18 19:01:49	0|wumpus|regarding 0.16.0, we're down to 5 PRs and 4 issues: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/30 almost there!
145 2018-01-18 19:02:15	0|sipa|i want to add support for segwit to importmulti; i want to have a PR for that today
146 2018-01-18 19:02:27	0|gmaxwell|oops.
147 2018-01-18 19:02:49	0|sipa|and if not, i'll create an issue
148 2018-01-18 19:03:01	0|wumpus|I guess #11124 can be closed because of #11991?
149 2018-01-18 19:03:03	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11124 | Generate segwit address in receive payment tab? · Issue #11124 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
150 2018-01-18 19:03:07	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11991 | [qt] Receive: checkbox for bech32 address by Sjors · Pull Request #11991 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
151 2018-01-18 19:03:16	0|meshcollider|I guess #11489 replaces the other issue too
152 2018-01-18 19:03:18	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11489 | [wallet] sendtoaddress output type argument by kallewoof · Pull Request #11489 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
153 2018-01-18 19:03:40	0|meshcollider|(11134)
154 2018-01-18 19:04:17	0|phantomcircuit|im here
155 2018-01-18 19:04:29	0|wumpus|meshcollider: merging that will automatically close the issue
156 2018-01-18 19:04:44	0|wumpus|(or should, as it's properly referenced in the PR)
157 2018-01-18 19:05:25	0|wumpus|I guess we should discuss  #12216
158 2018-01-18 19:05:26	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12216 | scripted-diff: prefix [address|change]type parameters with default by Sjors · Pull Request #12216 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
159 2018-01-18 19:05:30	0|achow101|should 11489 be tagged for 0.16?
160 2018-01-18 19:05:40	0|meshcollider|Yeah that's what I meant ^
161 2018-01-18 19:05:41	0|wumpus|#topic renamee address|changetype parameters
162 2018-01-18 19:05:58	0|wumpus|#11489
163 2018-01-18 19:06:00	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11489 | [wallet] sendtoaddress output type argument by kallewoof · Pull Request #11489 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
164 2018-01-18 19:06:20	0|meshcollider|I meant add the tag to the PR and take it off the issue
165 2018-01-18 19:06:42	0|jonasschnelli|defaultaddresstype seems fine... though I miss the wallet prefix (but it's no consistent anyways)
166 2018-01-18 19:07:08	0|jonasschnelli|I would have prefered -walletaddresstype
167 2018-01-18 19:07:16	0|jonasschnelli|but meh
168 2018-01-18 19:07:17	0|kanzure|hi.
169 2018-01-18 19:07:29	0|wumpus|-defaultwalletaddresstype !
170 2018-01-18 19:07:47	0|jonasschnelli|Bit long... but would be my the most precise one
171 2018-01-18 19:07:54	0|wumpus|I think it's overkill
172 2018-01-18 19:08:05	0|wumpus|the documentation can specify what the option is for, and what it applies to
173 2018-01-18 19:08:12	0|wumpus|the whole documentation does not need to be in the option name
174 2018-01-18 19:08:27	0|achow101|I don't particularly care about what it's called as long as the documentation explains it clearly
175 2018-01-18 19:08:27	0|jonasschnelli|Yes. Right. I think -defauladdresstype seems the best choice then.
176 2018-01-18 19:08:59	0|instagibbs|default is implied in a ton of arguments already, but whatever
177 2018-01-18 19:09:02	0|wumpus|shorter option names are easier to remember/type
178 2018-01-18 19:09:07	0|wumpus|instagibbs: I agree
179 2018-01-18 19:09:17	0|jonasschnelli|instagibbs: good point.
180 2018-01-18 19:09:23	0|jonasschnelli|Yes. Lets keep -addresstype then
181 2018-01-18 19:09:26	0|wumpus|I'm also not sure we should rename it at this point
182 2018-01-18 19:09:28	0|jonasschnelli|Don't add more unnecesarry work
183 2018-01-18 19:09:42	0|instagibbs|oh, im getting agreement, ok :)
184 2018-01-18 19:10:13	0|wumpus|as long as the help message explains that it changes the default, it should be fine
185 2018-01-18 19:10:16	0|wumpus|any other topics?
186 2018-01-18 19:10:34	0|achow101|Can i ask for #12180 to be in for 0.16?
187 2018-01-18 19:10:36	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12180 | scripted-diff: change kB to kvB, kilobyte to kilovbyte for transaction fee rate things by achow101 · Pull Request #12180 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
188 2018-01-18 19:10:58	0|wumpus|I think we should stop adding new PRs to 0.16.0, seriously
189 2018-01-18 19:11:01	0|sipa|Kilov Byte, sounds like a unit named after some russian scientist
190 2018-01-18 19:11:09	0|jonasschnelli|heh
191 2018-01-18 19:11:34	0|gmaxwell|then you can have charts of block's kilovbyte complexity.
192 2018-01-18 19:11:37	0|wumpus|lol!
193 2018-01-18 19:11:47	0|jtimon|hi
194 2018-01-18 19:11:48	0|wumpus|what the hell is that
195 2018-01-18 19:12:13	0|wumpus|ohh kilo-vbyte
196 2018-01-18 19:12:16	0|sipa|yeah :)
197 2018-01-18 19:12:17	0|gmaxwell|yes.
198 2018-01-18 19:12:18	0|wumpus|I don't like the word
199 2018-01-18 19:12:36	0|achow101|the base unit is vbyte
200 2018-01-18 19:13:02	0|meshcollider|What about vkilobyte
201 2018-01-18 19:13:06	0|wumpus|I get it, but kilovbyte just reads... awkward
202 2018-01-18 19:13:07	0|jonasschnelli|I think achow101 intentions are good. Maybe its just the wording. But I don't think it's necessary for the already later 0.16 release
203 2018-01-18 19:13:22	0|gmaxwell|it's extra confusing to people that our kilo is 1000 not 1024 there too. :)
204 2018-01-18 19:13:38	0|phantomcircuit|shouldn't the change output simply attempt to mirror the style of the payment address?
205 2018-01-18 19:13:45	0|wumpus|if it was 1024 it would be kivB
206 2018-01-18 19:13:49	0|phantomcircuit|regardless of whether that's segwit or not?
207 2018-01-18 19:13:52	0|sipa|phantomcircuit: there's a PR for that
208 2018-01-18 19:13:54	0|gmaxwell|phantomcircuit: there is a PR for that.
209 2018-01-18 19:14:15	0|gmaxwell|phantomcircuit: though you don't want to start using segwit in a wallet that is set to NOT use segwit in legacy mode.
210 2018-01-18 19:14:22	0|jonasschnelli|Should #12213 be in 0.16?
211 2018-01-18 19:14:24	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12213 | Add address type option to addmultisigaddress by promag · Pull Request #12213 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
212 2018-01-18 19:14:30	0|achow101|the point was to clarify that the fee rate is in virtual bytes and not actual bytes
213 2018-01-18 19:14:57	0|wumpus|achow101: yes, I completely agree with that point
214 2018-01-18 19:15:08	0|wumpus|but making up new words, I don't know
215 2018-01-18 19:15:10	0|gmaxwell|I don't like the word virtual. We should call them victory bytes.
216 2018-01-18 19:15:23	0|booyah|what about wu? kwu? wasn't work unit a thing
217 2018-01-18 19:15:27	0|jonasschnelli|#12194 would also be trivial for 0.16 (and add consistent addresstype support)
218 2018-01-18 19:15:29	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12194 | Add change type option to fundrawtransaction by promag · Pull Request #12194 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
219 2018-01-18 19:15:32	0|booyah|*weight
220 2018-01-18 19:15:48	0|achow101|according to rusty, they're called sipas
221 2018-01-18 19:16:03	0|wumpus|lol oh no, not more things for 0.16.0, do we ever want to release this
222 2018-01-18 19:16:07	0|gmaxwell|booyah: weight isn't directly comparible to the fee units people have gotten used to.
223 2018-01-18 19:16:13	0|meshcollider|booyah: using weight means factor of 4 difference in the actual number which will confuse people I think
224 2018-01-18 19:16:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #12221: RFC: Rename -walletdir option to -walletsdir (scripted-diff) (06master...06pr/wdren) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12221
225 2018-01-18 19:16:35	0|gmaxwell|wallet'sdir ?
226 2018-01-18 19:16:36	0|gmaxwell|:P
227 2018-01-18 19:16:47	0|wumpus|noooo
228 2018-01-18 19:16:54	0|kanzure|multiwalletdir?
229 2018-01-18 19:17:05	0|wumpus|just stick to walletdir, don't add a s in there please
230 2018-01-18 19:17:08	0|gmaxwell|ack
231 2018-01-18 19:17:11	0|wumpus|I'll forget that every time
232 2018-01-18 19:17:16	0|phantomcircuit|shouldn't the change script type match the payment type for sendtoaddress ?
233 2018-01-18 19:17:24	0|phantomcircuit|regardless of whether it's segwit or not
234 2018-01-18 19:17:36	0|wumpus|again, not the entire documentation of an option needs to be in the option name
235 2018-01-18 19:17:46	0|gmaxwell|phantomcircuit: 11:13:52 < sipa> phantomcircuit: there's a PR for that
236 2018-01-18 19:17:48	0|wumpus|keeping option names short in general is good
237 2018-01-18 19:17:53	0|phantomcircuit|ok
238 2018-01-18 19:17:59	0|kanzure|options should be replaced by hexadecimal identifiers, so that documentation must be consulted?
239 2018-01-18 19:18:03	0|phantomcircuit|(got disconnected didn't think that went through)
240 2018-01-18 19:18:30	0|sipa|kanzure: double-SHA256 of the english description of the option, so that you show you've actually read the documentation
241 2018-01-18 19:18:40	0|gmaxwell|phantomcircuit: to at least a limited extent, if the wallet is allowed to use segwit (not legacy mode), then it'll toggle between native segwit and p2sh based on the outputs.
242 2018-01-18 19:19:11	0|jcorgan|bech32 would be how the hipsters would do it
243 2018-01-18 19:19:16	0|gmaxwell|phantomcircuit: I'd like to see that PR get merged because it should increase native usage a bunch.
244 2018-01-18 19:19:34	0|wumpus|do we need 32948 PRs that just rename options
245 2018-01-18 19:20:24	0|morcos|wumpus: Thirty Two Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Eight Pull Requests?
246 2018-01-18 19:20:32	0|wumpus|morcos: yes
247 2018-01-18 19:21:01	0|meshcollider|More pull requests = more active development though right ;)
248 2018-01-18 19:21:14	0|gmaxwell|wumpus: well there are many more possible renamings than that, so we have a long way to go. :P
249 2018-01-18 19:21:15	0|booyah|wumpus: we do not? (:
250 2018-01-18 19:21:31	0|jtimon|wumpus: right, as long as names are clear, the shoreter the better
251 2018-01-18 19:21:50	0|jtimon|s/shoreter/shorter/
252 2018-01-18 19:22:02	0|meshcollider|Let's just start using -a, -b, -c ....
253 2018-01-18 19:22:33	0|jtimon|meshcollider: you forgot the "as long as they are clear" part :p
254 2018-01-18 19:22:51	0|wumpus|any other topics?
255 2018-01-18 19:23:24	0|sipa|let's get back to work!
256 2018-01-18 19:23:29	0|meshcollider|And more update about signing certs?
257 2018-01-18 19:23:46	0|jonasschnelli|cfields
258 2018-01-18 19:23:49	0|meshcollider|Any*
259 2018-01-18 19:24:30	0|jonasschnelli|Last state is that we are going to sign 0.16 with a single person RSA
260 2018-01-18 19:24:35	0|jonasschnelli|(OSX)
261 2018-01-18 19:24:57	0|jtimon|mircrotopic if since I wasn't here for the priority prs topic: can https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12172 haz priority and maybe even get to 0.16 ?
262 2018-01-18 19:25:46	0|MarcoFalke|I think only what is tagged 0.16 is priority right now
263 2018-01-18 19:25:56	0|MarcoFalke|We didn't do the priority prs thing
264 2018-01-18 19:26:21	0|wumpus|yes, high priority for review is the 0.16 milestone list right now
265 2018-01-18 19:26:36	0|wumpus|we'll start using the project again after 0.16 is branched
266 2018-01-18 19:26:44	0|MarcoFalke|end meeting?
267 2018-01-18 19:26:49	0|jtimon|MarcoFalke: ok, perhaps it can be priority review but not for 0.16 or priority review but only after 0.16 is forked or something, I don't know
268 2018-01-18 19:27:26	0|MarcoFalke|jtimon: I reviewed it. If other people like it they will come by, I guess.
269 2018-01-18 19:27:42	0|wumpus|jtimon: I've added it to the project anyhow
270 2018-01-18 19:28:34	0|wumpus|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/30 is at 8 PRs, 3 issues now
271 2018-01-18 19:28:51	0|wumpus|we gained 3 PRs during this meeting, and closed one issue
272 2018-01-18 19:29:16	0|jonasschnelli|heh... oh boy
273 2018-01-18 19:29:28	0|meshcollider|#12216 can be removed if we decided not to do it?
274 2018-01-18 19:29:30	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12216 | scripted-diff: prefix [address|change]type parameters with default by Sjors · Pull Request #12216 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
275 2018-01-18 19:29:51	0|jonasschnelli|I think #11281 is ready... though another ack would be great
276 2018-01-18 19:29:55	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11281 | Avoid permanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #11281 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
277 2018-01-18 19:29:56	0|MarcoFalke|They are just tagged for 0.16. I think some should be closed without merge
278 2018-01-18 19:29:59	0|jtimon|MarcoFalke: thanks, I was just testing waters and as said "microtopic", I can always rebase this tiny thing for my purposes, it's just always good to get the thing you need in if you can, but no big deal at all
279 2018-01-18 19:30:16	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: so they're not all blockers for 0.16?
280 2018-01-18 19:30:33	0|MarcoFalke|Not all, imo
281 2018-01-18 19:30:56	0|MarcoFalke|e.g. #11489 is clearly a feature
282 2018-01-18 19:30:58	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11489 | [wallet] sendtoaddress output type argument by kallewoof · Pull Request #11489 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
283 2018-01-18 19:31:24	0|jtimon|as said I missed half the meeting but I imagine the leitmotive was "0.16, let's do this!" or something
284 2018-01-18 19:31:33	0|meshcollider|wumpus: #11708 is not on the milestone but might be RTM anyway and would be nice
285 2018-01-18 19:31:37	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11708 | Add P2SH-P2WSH support to signrawtransaction and listunspent RPC by MeshCollider · Pull Request #11708 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
286 2018-01-18 19:31:47	0|wumpus|ok removed #12216
287 2018-01-18 19:31:49	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12216 | scripted-diff: prefix [address|change]type parameters with default by Sjors · Pull Request #12216 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
288 2018-01-18 19:32:26	0|jonasschnelli|Remove #11489 as well? Got also a NACK
289 2018-01-18 19:32:29	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11489 | [wallet] sendtoaddress output type argument by kallewoof · Pull Request #11489 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
290 2018-01-18 19:32:31	0|sipa|well 12216 either goes into 0.16, or we don't do it at all - i don't think we should be renaming options that have been in releases
291 2018-01-18 19:32:40	0|wumpus|jtimon: yes, the action was supposed to be 'release 0.16', but we're not there yet apparently :)
292 2018-01-18 19:32:47	0|wumpus|I hope we can do that next week
293 2018-01-18 19:32:55	0|gmaxwell|oh the walletdir stuff wasn't already released?
294 2018-01-18 19:33:02	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: yes.
295 2018-01-18 19:33:10	0|jnewbery|gmaxwell: correct
296 2018-01-18 19:33:13	0|gmaxwell|renaming it is less crazy than I was thinking.
297 2018-01-18 19:33:22	0|wumpus|gmaxwell: no, it's new in 0.16
298 2018-01-18 19:33:41	0|jtimon|wumpus: too bad, but are we ready to fork 0.16?
299 2018-01-18 19:33:47	0|wumpus|jtimon: no!
300 2018-01-18 19:33:56	0|wumpus|we're not ready yet we're not ready yet
301 2018-01-18 19:34:11	0|MarcoFalke|Hopefully early next week, jtimon
302 2018-01-18 19:34:16	0|gmaxwell|You have to say it three times for the spell to work.
303 2018-01-18 19:34:20	0|wumpus|I think we're waiting for sipa's PR and reviews of some of the others
304 2018-01-18 19:34:33	0|wumpus|gmaxwell: we're not ready yet we're not ready yet we're not ready yet
305 2018-01-18 19:34:34	0|jtimon|ok, as always I complain about the release process slowing donw master, which is probably unavoidable
306 2018-01-18 19:34:50	0|meshcollider|Ok remove 11489 and 11134 then?
307 2018-01-18 19:34:53	0|wumpus|can't make everyone happy
308 2018-01-18 19:35:04	0|wumpus|we also don't want to do a crappy release
309 2018-01-18 19:35:44	0|wumpus|better to have it slip a bit and make sure everything is working as it should, than rush it out
310 2018-01-18 19:36:07	0|gmaxwell|0.16 is very important, I don't think anything !0.16 that is in flight right now is remotely as important as getting 0.16 out soon.
311 2018-01-18 19:36:40	0|jonasschnelli|Removed #11489 from 0.16
312 2018-01-18 19:36:42	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11489 | [wallet] sendtoaddress output type argument by kallewoof · Pull Request #11489 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
313 2018-01-18 19:36:49	0|jtimon|sorry, guys, I'm just impacient, but I wasn't impacient enought to fully review the already merged sw wallet support, so I don't feel I can ask for anything (also as always)
314 2018-01-18 19:36:55	0|gmaxwell|So in the unlikely event that someone can't contribute to making 0.16 better, I think we're still better off with them sitting on their hands rather than doing anything that would make 0.16 take longer or be less good.
315 2018-01-18 19:37:20	0|wumpus|jtimon: exactly, if you want to help hurry the release along, help testing and reviewing the PRs that are left
316 2018-01-18 19:37:46	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky closed pull request #12221: RFC: Rename -walletdir option to -walletsdir (scripted-diff) (06master...06pr/wdren) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12221
317 2018-01-18 19:37:59	0|meshcollider|jonasschnelli: I think the corresponding issue should be removed too
318 2018-01-18 19:38:13	0|jonasschnelli|meshcollider: thanks
319 2018-01-18 19:38:52	0|wumpus|ok, any other topics? if not, let's close early
320 2018-01-18 19:39:07	0|jtimon|wumpus: I know, but I probably won't, I'm sorry, just reiterating my old complain that master shouldn't ever be stopped, no big deal
321 2018-01-18 19:39:22	0|gmaxwell|Noted.
322 2018-01-18 19:39:35	0|wumpus|#endmeeting
323 2018-01-18 19:39:36	0|lightningbot|Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-01-18-19.00.log.html
324 2018-01-18 19:39:36	0|lightningbot|Meeting ended Thu Jan 18 19:39:35 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
325 2018-01-18 19:39:36	0|lightningbot|Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-01-18-19.00.html
326 2018-01-18 19:39:36	0|lightningbot|Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-01-18-19.00.txt
327 2018-01-18 19:40:09	0|wumpus|jtimon: yes, normally we work according to a schedule, this time it's a bit more ad-hoc, on purpose, we won't make a habit out of it
328 2018-01-18 19:40:37	0|meshcollider|It's annoying that the minutes now include every issue that was mentioned in the meeting including repeats...
329 2018-01-18 19:40:54	0|instagibbs|sounds like a job for blockchain
330 2018-01-18 19:40:55	0|jtimon|I know, I think this is very good, I will always ask for even better, sorry
331 2018-01-18 19:41:14	0|gmaxwell|phantomcircuit: on change address matching, our power to do that is kinda limited:  If the output type is p2sh or p2wsh we can't actually tell whats in it, and our usage may look nothing like it.  And also we're not about to use p2pkh on a wallet that is otherwise segwit, just because the payee uses it... since the fee impact to the user would be non-negigible. (though perhaps it would be reason
332 2018-01-18 19:41:20	0|gmaxwell|able to allow that behavior to be configured)
333 2018-01-18 19:42:55	0|gmaxwell|phantomcircuit: what the open PR does, IIRC is if your wallet is configured to use p2sh-embedded-segwit (e.g. the default in master), it will use native segwit for the change if any of the requested outputs are native segwit.
334 2018-01-18 19:43:00	0|sipa|also, once native is common on the network for payments (= many transactions exist which just have a single native segwit output), it may make sense to change the default to producing bech32 change regardless of payment destination, as it's not a privacy leak anymore
335 2018-01-18 19:44:11	0|gmaxwell|and I assume that once BC1 addresses are accepted almost everywhere, we'll change the default to native, and probably keep using native even if the output type is p2sh.
336 2018-01-18 19:44:34	0|gmaxwell|You could argue that there is some advantage to matching, but I think its washed out by the high probablity that the underlying p2sh script does not match.
337 2018-01-18 19:44:47	0|gmaxwell|and the tx fee savings of native.
338 2018-01-18 19:45:27	0|jtimon|wumpus: we haven't forked .16 yet, which imo is generally good until the 0.16 milestone only has 2 or 3 prs left, I just hate duplicating prs and also talling people (specially myelf) to wait until that happens. I'm certain you guys have done what I think it's best: merge prs or move for later in that list before forking. sorry, I'm being reiterative
339 2018-01-18 19:47:24	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14cc90a4f 15Russell Yanofsky: Avoid potential null dereference in ReceiveCoinsDialog constructor...
340 2018-01-18 19:47:24	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/898f560b55ab...10d10d7fadcf
341 2018-01-18 19:47:25	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1410d10d7 15Jonas Schnelli: Merge #12211: Avoid potential null dereference in ReceiveCoinsDialog constructor...
342 2018-01-18 19:48:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli closed pull request #12211: Avoid potential null dereference in ReceiveCoinsDialog constructor (06master...06pr/nullrecv) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12211
343 2018-01-18 20:04:39	0|jnewbery|wumpus: two ACKs for the docs clarification in #12166. It should be merged before v0.16 (or not at all)
344 2018-01-18 20:04:42	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12166 | [docs] Clarify -walletdir usage by jnewbery · Pull Request #12166 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
345 2018-01-18 20:05:23	0|gmaxwell|merge all the docs
346 2018-01-18 20:05:36	0|jonasschnelli|jnewbery: I'll have a look
347 2018-01-18 20:05:53	0|wumpus|jnewbery: I think the relative path functionality should be removed
348 2018-01-18 20:06:15	0|wumpus|jnewbery: e.g. #12220
349 2018-01-18 20:06:17	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12220 | RFC: Error if relative -walletdir is specified by ryanofsky · Pull Request #12220 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
350 2018-01-18 20:06:56	0|jnewbery|ok, if 12220 is going to be merged, I should update the release docs to reflect that
351 2018-01-18 20:07:11	0|wumpus|but I'll tag it for 0.16, doc PRs don't hurt
352 2018-01-18 20:07:20	0|ryanofsky|just merge the doc pr now?
353 2018-01-18 20:07:26	0|ryanofsky|i can update the docs in the other one
354 2018-01-18 20:07:43	0|wumpus|ok
355 2018-01-18 20:08:06	0|jnewbery|depends on merge order. I'm happy to update 12166 if 12220 gets merged
356 2018-01-18 20:08:27	0|ryanofsky|same, doc pr seems ready to go though
357 2018-01-18 20:09:27	0|jonasschnelli|12166 is pure documentation regardless of forbidding the relative paths...
358 2018-01-18 20:09:36	0|jonasschnelli|(and its ready for merge IMO)
359 2018-01-18 20:09:56	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1497c3cad 15John Newbery: [docs] Clarify -walletdir usage
360 2018-01-18 20:09:56	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/10d10d7fadcf...e839d6570d9d
361 2018-01-18 20:09:57	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e839d65 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12166: [docs] Clarify -walletdir usage...
362 2018-01-18 20:10:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #12166: [docs] Clarify -walletdir usage (06master...06clarify_walletdir_usage) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12166
363 2018-01-18 20:10:52	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: I would have been ok with relative paths if they meant 'relative to datadir' as other relative paths in our options, but relative to current directory isn't really acceptable, that's simply a recipe for confusion, especially if provided in bitcoin.conf
364 2018-01-18 20:11:05	0|wumpus|but forbidding relative paths for the walletdir is fine too
365 2018-01-18 20:11:49	0|jonasschnelli|Yes. I'd say we should forbid relative path for the wallet dir.
366 2018-01-18 20:12:02	0|jonasschnelli|(just said not in 12166)
367 2018-01-18 20:12:26	0|ryanofsky|datadir-relative paths make sense to me too, but we can always add that later if relative paths disallowed now
368 2018-01-18 20:12:40	0|wumpus|yyes, agreed ryanofsky
369 2018-01-18 20:12:45	0|jonasschnelli|+1
370 2018-01-18 20:21:36	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: looks like your mainnet DNS seed is malfunctioning
371 2018-01-18 20:21:46	0|jonasschnelli|damit...
372 2018-01-18 20:21:48	0|jonasschnelli|let me check
373 2018-01-18 20:22:18	0|jonasschnelli|hmm... looks good.
374 2018-01-18 20:22:32	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: what issue did you got on your side?
375 2018-01-18 20:23:10	0|jonasschnelli|Getting successful requests/responses as well
376 2018-01-18 20:25:02	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: seems to work again now
377 2018-01-18 20:25:18	0|wumpus|just a few minutes ago, and earlier today it was not
378 2018-01-18 20:25:33	0|jonasschnelli|hmm... maybe a servercenter issue? logs are looking good.
379 2018-01-18 20:27:07	0|wumpus|yes, want that too :)
380 2018-01-18 20:27:32	0|jonasschnelli|Just so uneconomical...
381 2018-01-18 20:46:22	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 147767842 15Jeremiah Buddenhagen: Trivial: Fix spelling in zapwallettxes test description...
382 2018-01-18 20:46:22	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e839d6570d9d...9a97f39afaa8
383 2018-01-18 20:46:23	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 149a97f39 15MarcoFalke: Merge #12212: Trivial: Fix spelling in zapwallettxes test description...
384 2018-01-18 20:47:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12212: Trivial: Fix spelling in zapwallettxes test description (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12212
385 2018-01-18 21:11:48	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12216: scripted-diff: prefix [address|change]type parameters with 'default' (06master...062018/01/defaultaddresstype) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12216