1 2018-01-24 01:42:19	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jimpo opened pull request #12254: BIP 158: Compact Block Filters for Light Clients (06master...06bip-158) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12254
  2 2018-01-24 01:58:36	0|phantomcircuit|jimpo, can you make it so the individual commits in 12254 actually work independently?
  3 2018-01-24 01:58:57	0|phantomcircuit|pr's like that where the individual commits result in broken code make things like bisect less useful
  4 2018-01-24 02:08:33	0|jimpo|I thought they do. What one breaks the build?
  5 2018-01-24 02:19:25	0|phantomcircuit|jimpo, hmm yeah you're right that it doesn't actually, my mistake
  6 2018-01-24 02:19:43	0|phantomcircuit|still kind of odd to define interfaces in one commit and then implement them in several others i think
  7 2018-01-24 02:19:49	0|phantomcircuit|but maybe that's just me
  8 2018-01-24 02:27:25	0|jimpo|Yeah, that's just sort of what made the most sense to me as far as trying to communicate why code is happening. Basically, it's just a lot of new code and I wanted to break it up somehow.
  9 2018-01-24 05:36:06	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15dongcarl opened pull request #12255: Update bitcoin.service to conform to init.md (06master...06patch-2) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12255
 10 2018-01-24 06:11:23	0|mryandao|whats the general advice to "clean up commit body"?
 11 2018-01-24 06:11:43	0|mryandao|does it mean I just have to rebase and re-write the commit message to reflect the final changes?
 12 2018-01-24 06:12:02	0|mryandao|sorry, i'm still very new to contributing.
 13 2018-01-24 06:16:54	0|gmaxwell|context?
 14 2018-01-24 06:18:00	0|mryandao|gmaxwell: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12240
 15 2018-01-24 06:20:08	0|r251d|mryandao: I think "commit body" refers to the commit message at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12240/commits/acde12c2f651912fdd04e4e50638502d5de26e91
 16 2018-01-24 06:22:47	0|mryandao|basically just summarising the actual stuff i'm contributing less the changes made in all the commits i've squashed?
 17 2018-01-24 06:25:39	0|r251d|I'm not sure exactly what to change about it but I think it may just be a bit verbose. Contributing.md says this:
 18 2018-01-24 06:25:48	0|r251d|> Commit messages should be verbose by default consisting of a short subject line (50 chars max), a blank line and detailed explanatory text as separate paragraph(s), unless the title alone is self-explanatory (like "Corrected typo in init.cpp") in which case a single title line is sufficient. Commit messages should be helpful to people reading your code in the future, so explain the reasoning for
 19 2018-01-24 06:25:48	0|r251d|your decisions. Further explanation here.
 20 2018-01-24 06:28:31	0|gmaxwell|mryandao: Its not clear to me what you're being asked to do there. Feel free to ask.
 21 2018-01-24 06:34:17	0|Randolf|mryandao:  You're new too?  And you got Squashing working?  You're ahead of me then.  :)
 22 2018-01-24 06:35:05	0|mryandao|the instructions were easy to follow.
 23 2018-01-24 06:35:22	0|mryandao|way more inituitive than git rebase --help really.
 24 2018-01-24 06:39:30	0|Randolf|I think I got rebasing working today.  Nothing showed up on GitHub.com though, so I figured it got queued or something and I'll check again later.
 25 2018-01-24 06:43:32	0|mryandao|you gotta do a git push -f
 26 2018-01-24 06:44:02	0|mryandao|and it should show in github.com after the push is done.
 27 2018-01-24 06:46:31	0|Randolf|I did that, it asked for my username and password, and then it finally reported that everything is up to date.
 28 2018-01-24 06:49:42	0|r251d|promag: could you please clarify your nit about commit body cleanup for mryandao at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12240 ?
 29 2018-01-24 07:16:33	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15kallewoof opened pull request #12257: [wallet] Use destination groups instead of coins in coin select (06master...06feature-addrgrouped-coinselect) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12257
 30 2018-01-24 07:28:56	0|ProfMac|Is there a channel for people who want to study the code, but aren't strong developers?
 31 2018-01-24 07:31:30	0|Randolf|ProfMac:  There is a #bitcoin-dev channel.
 32 2018-01-24 07:46:14	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: very cool
 33 2018-01-24 07:47:29	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: did you consider/try  having the non-avoidpartialspends mode first try to see it to see if there is a solution?  I assume everyone would prefer an avoidpartial solution if it was otherwise about as good.
 34 2018-01-24 07:49:14	0|luke-jr|kallewoof: that doesn't avoid reuse, and has security issues in the event of QC (but we have enough issues there already, so not a big deal), but seems useful anyway
 35 2018-01-24 07:51:02	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: it doesn't avoid reuse, but it reduces one of its major harms.
 36 2018-01-24 07:51:13	0|luke-jr|yes, hence useful anyway
 37 2018-01-24 07:51:20	0|gmaxwell|right now even a small amount of reuse results in your entire wallet being common-input linked.
 38 2018-01-24 07:52:42	0|luke-jr|my point was only that it isn't an "avoid address reuse" category PR as it seemed to be suggesting it was ;)
 39 2018-01-24 07:58:26	0|gmaxwell|luke-jr: we could probably do a lot wrt reuse with two small features: when you send to an address you've sent to before, put up a dialog that asks if you're making a mistake.  (we've certantly seen people mess up by double paying addresses); and put a 'reuse' icon on any transaction paying you that pays to an address which has already been paid.
 40 2018-01-24 08:36:37	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: you mean it should try to avoid partial spending and if it finds a fairly optimal solution it picks it over the per-coin selector?
 41 2018-01-24 08:37:25	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: I'm not sure what would be a good factor for determining success in that case, but it does sound like a good strategy. (Maybe simply # of inputs with enabled vs disabled? If same, use the no-partial-spends variant.)
 42 2018-01-24 08:38:52	0|kallewoof|also, as noted in the PR, it is a fix to an issue raised in a different PR which marks addresses dirty. The two PRs together would avoid reuse completely, I believe. (Correct me if I'm missing something, though!)
 43 2018-01-24 08:38:58	0|kallewoof|luke-jr: ^
 44 2018-01-24 08:39:13	0|kallewoof|s/issue raised/issue addressed/
 45 2018-01-24 08:41:35	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: the decision criteria is a complicated question that is cropping up in other areas too... generally if the current feerate is low compared to what you expect in the future you want to be spending more inputs, if it's high, fewer--  though solutions without change are preferable.
 46 2018-01-24 08:46:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15tviho opened pull request #12258: Change app name, datadir location/settings (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12258
 47 2018-01-24 08:46:51	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: ahh.. that's a good point. I really like the idea of testing both cases and using the avoidpartialspends variant if it's only marginally worse.
 48 2018-01-24 08:48:00	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake closed pull request #12258: Change app name, datadir location/settings (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12258
 49 2018-01-24 08:48:00	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: just not sure what to base the criteria on. Maybe that's a different PR. It's simply a matter of calling https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12257/files#diff-b2bb174788c7409b671c46ccc86034bdR4228 with false once and true once and comparing.
 50 2018-01-24 08:55:05	0|gmaxwell|well at a minimum you can prefer the avoidpartial solution if it pays equal or less total fees, I think.
 51 2018-01-24 08:55:48	0|gmaxwell|Though I know that isn't ideal, but I think it's strictly better than not trying.
 52 2018-01-24 08:57:30	0|kallewoof|If the fee rate is decided on coin selection (I don't think it is, but have to check), it could be used to consider more inputs as a better solution, maybe. I think I'll do the 'equal or less fee' fix right away though (but will it, ever? won't the same solution be found by the less restricted variant?)
 53 2018-01-24 08:58:19	0|kallewoof|I mean, if the fee rate is really low, it could see it as an opportunity to group up inputs. I think that's flawed, though, so nevermind.
 54 2018-01-24 09:00:26	0|gmaxwell|Fee rate is known then, so the software could decide to prefer more vs fewer, the challenge is how do you know if a specific feerate is a high vs a low one?
 55 2018-01-24 09:01:37	0|gmaxwell|as far as "won't it find it" -- unlikely, the stochastic solver only evaluates a tiny fraction of the search space... imagine you have 10 addresses, and 10 payments each, its unlikely the ungrouped solver will ever consider spending just two groups.
 56 2018-01-24 09:02:29	0|gmaxwell|I wouldn't be surprised if the grouped solution we seldom lower fees, though it might be equal not that infrequently.
 57 2018-01-24 09:04:54	0|kallewoof|Okay... yeah, I haven't considered the more complex cases. I'm mostly thinking of this from the "one actual payment with a bunch of tiny dust payments to track you" scenario.
 58 2018-01-24 09:08:11	0|gmaxwell|I was about to say that with feerates at least tracking dust is less of an issue ... but then I remembed the last couple days...
 59 2018-01-24 09:08:39	0|gmaxwell|fun fact: I noticed recently that some obvious tracking dust I got years ago is now worth $10 each. :)
 60 2018-01-24 09:08:48	0|kallewoof|lol
 61 2018-01-24 09:12:22	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: the only straightforward way I could think of to check if the fee drops is the # of coins selected (I assume every input + signature will cost the same, which is untrue with segwit vs p2pkh, but I think that's not a big issue in the long run)
 62 2018-01-24 09:13:33	0|gmaxwell|well one might have change and the other not...
 63 2018-01-24 09:13:42	0|gmaxwell|you could compare their weight instead?
 64 2018-01-24 09:16:36	0|kallewoof|I'm checking for change by seeing if nValueFromPresetInputs + nValueRet2 == nTargetValue. That's not precise though, due to dust limits and such, I guess.
 65 2018-01-24 09:16:59	0|kallewoof|I didn't know you could get the weight for coins. Will look.
 66 2018-01-24 09:19:52	0|gmaxwell|oh I see.
 67 2018-01-24 09:20:01	0|gmaxwell|right you're working with selections, not transactions.
 68 2018-01-24 09:20:02	0|kallewoof|Okay, I think I understand what you mean -- make both transactions and compare their weights and pick the avoid-partial one if it's reasonable in comparison to the non-avoiding one.
 69 2018-01-24 09:20:19	0|gmaxwell|yes, I was thinking that you were working with transactions for some reason.
 70 2018-01-24 09:20:27	0|kallewoof|I was hoping to do all this in SelectCoins. (My patch currently looks like this: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12257/commits/4593c6164891e5d766b33952702195288a241b2d)
 71 2018-01-24 09:21:27	0|promag|mryandao: do you need help addressing my comment??
 72 2018-01-24 09:22:09	0|gmaxwell|kallewoof: I think it's not unreasonable to do that.
 73 2018-01-24 09:56:15	0|kallewoof|gmaxwell: I think I've got it. Not sure what reviewers will say though (I wrapped CWallet::CreateTransaction and called the original twice for the case where avoid-partial is unset)... https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12257/commits/3af1fac480fa08f92cd611ce93885d4501acc676
 74 2018-01-24 10:26:24	0|kallewoof|(It's failing in places; will fix & push update later.)
 75 2018-01-24 11:57:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 6 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b5e4b9b5100e...8470e64724cb
 76 2018-01-24 11:57:10	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 148d0b610 15Jonas Schnelli: Avoid pemanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during wallet rescans
 77 2018-01-24 11:57:10	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14dbf8556 15Jonas Schnelli: Add RAII wallet rescan reserver
 78 2018-01-24 11:57:11	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14bc356b4 15Jonas Schnelli: Make sure WalletRescanReserver has successfully reserved the rescan
 79 2018-01-24 11:57:37	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11281: Avoid permanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime (06master...062017/09/rescan_locks) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11281
 80 2018-01-24 11:59:43	0|promag|\o/
 81 2018-01-24 12:07:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 5 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8470e64724cb...6e89de5ba7ce
 82 2018-01-24 12:07:29	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1451ae766 15Matt Corallo: Use GetDesireableServiceFlags in static seeds, document this....
 83 2018-01-24 12:07:29	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fb6f6b1 15Matt Corallo: bluematt's testnet-seed now supports x9 (and is just a static list)
 84 2018-01-24 12:07:30	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1462e7642 15Matt Corallo: Fall back to oneshot for DNS Seeds which don't support filtering....
 85 2018-01-24 12:08:01	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11512: Use GetDesireableServiceFlags in seeds, dnsseeds, fixing static seed adding (06master...062017-10-seed-service-bits-cleanups) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11512
 86 2018-01-24 12:18:05	0|promag|wumpus: #12213 do you agree with jnewbery?
 87 2018-01-24 12:18:07	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12213 | Add address type to addmultisigaddress and createmultisig by promag · Pull Request #12213 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 88 2018-01-24 12:20:08	0|wumpus|promag: I agree it makes sense to separate it out and discuss it separately, not making it hold up 0.16
 89 2018-01-24 12:20:23	0|promag|ok, I'll adjust
 90 2018-01-24 12:21:35	0|wumpus|I agree with his points, also that we really don't want to be introducing new #ifdef ENABLE_WALLET, but in any case let's get the other two commits in
 91 2018-01-24 12:23:31	0|wumpus|it's doubly interesting because this code within ENABLE_WALLET doesn't use any wallet, implying, if we want this, that there is some utility code that needs to be moved out of the wallet
 92 2018-01-24 12:33:26	0|wumpus|going to merge #11415 first, seems it's ready
 93 2018-01-24 12:33:30	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11415 | [RPC] Disallow using addresses in createmultisig by achow101 · Pull Request #11415 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 94 2018-01-24 13:04:05	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 141df206f 15Andrew Chow: Disallow using addresses in createmultisig...
 95 2018-01-24 13:04:05	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/6e89de5ba7ce...69ec021969a4
 96 2018-01-24 13:04:06	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1469ec021 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11415: [RPC] Disallow using addresses in createmultisig...
 97 2018-01-24 13:04:29	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11415: [RPC] Disallow using addresses in createmultisig (06master...06createmultisig-no-addr) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11415
 98 2018-01-24 13:52:27	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/69ec021969a4...126000ba9e7f
 99 2018-01-24 13:52:28	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fae7b14 15MarcoFalke: qa: Make TestNodeCLI command optional in send_cli
100 2018-01-24 13:52:28	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ffffb10 15MarcoFalke: qa: Rename cli.args to cli.options...
101 2018-01-24 13:52:29	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14126000b 15MarcoFalke: Merge #12089: qa: Make TestNodeCLI command optional in send_cli...
102 2018-01-24 13:53:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12089: qa: Make TestNodeCLI command optional in send_cli (06master...06Mf1801-qaCliOptions) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12089
103 2018-01-24 14:23:09	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14596c446 15Sjors Provoost: [wallet] use P2WPKH change output if any destination is P2WPKH or P2WSH...
104 2018-01-24 14:23:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/126000ba9e7f...95941396fff8
105 2018-01-24 14:23:10	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 149594139 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12119: [wallet] use P2WPKH change output if any destination is P2WPKH or P2WSH...
106 2018-01-24 14:23:56	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #12119:  [wallet] use P2WPKH change output if any destination is P2WPKH or P2WSH (06master...06bech32-change) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12119
107 2018-01-24 14:52:35	0|promag|wumpus: #12213, rebased and removed createmultisig change
108 2018-01-24 14:52:37	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12213 | Add address type to addmultisigaddress and createmultisig by promag · Pull Request #12213 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
109 2018-01-24 14:59:55	0|wumpus|promag: thanks!
110 2018-01-24 15:00:14	0|promag|taking care of #12194 too
111 2018-01-24 15:00:17	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12194 | Add change type option to fundrawtransaction by promag · Pull Request #12194 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
112 2018-01-24 15:34:07	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1404ededf 15Russell Yanofsky: Make CKey::Load references const...
113 2018-01-24 15:34:07	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/95941396fff8...e37ca2be91bd
114 2018-01-24 15:34:08	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e37ca2b 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12250: Make CKey::Load references const...
115 2018-01-24 15:34:57	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #12250: Make CKey::Load references const (06master...06pr/keyload) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12250
116 2018-01-24 15:35:39	0|promag|wumpus: pushed #12194
117 2018-01-24 15:35:41	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12194 | Add change type option to fundrawtransaction by promag · Pull Request #12194 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
118 2018-01-24 15:35:52	0|promag|those are the last 2 in 0.16 millestone
119 2018-01-24 15:38:48	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 141e0d6e9 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: tx: Update transifex slug for 0.16...
120 2018-01-24 15:38:48	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e37ca2be91bd...6e3fe936090d
121 2018-01-24 15:38:49	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146e3fe93 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Update translation source file...
122 2018-01-24 15:44:44	0|achow101|Oh! 0.16 is almost ready. Only 2 PRs left
123 2018-01-24 15:45:19	0|wumpus|yep, I hope we can tag it after the meeting tomorrow
124 2018-01-24 15:45:40	0|wumpus|rc1, I mean
125 2018-01-24 15:46:52	0|wumpus|still need to some some release process things, such as updating hardcoded seeds
126 2018-01-24 15:50:42	0|sipa|wumpus: do we want #12253 in 0.16?
127 2018-01-24 15:50:43	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12253 | SegWit support for importmulti · Issue #12253 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
128 2018-01-24 15:51:49	0|wumpus|sipa: if possible, but I think it's getting a bit late for that
129 2018-01-24 15:52:32	0|sipa|i certainly won't have time until next week
130 2018-01-24 15:52:34	0|wumpus|I assume the code still needs to be written, and ofc it will need to go through a review cycle
131 2018-01-24 15:52:43	0|wumpus|right, so I guess that means no
132 2018-01-24 15:53:26	0|wumpus|should probably mention lack of support in importmulti it in the 'known issues' in the release notes
133 2018-01-24 15:53:30	0|promag|is that a thing for a 0.16.1?
134 2018-01-24 15:53:30	0|sipa|you think it's not essential?
135 2018-01-24 15:53:51	0|wumpus|no, I don't think it's essential
136 2018-01-24 15:54:04	0|promag|sipa: you think it is?
137 2018-01-24 15:54:24	0|sipa|signmessage may be worse, as it may silently break for people who didn't know we were switching to a new address format
138 2018-01-24 15:54:24	0|wumpus|but I think segwit address support is worth a release in itself, even if not all supporting features have made it in yet
139 2018-01-24 15:54:45	0|wumpus|so that one needs to be mentioned in the release notes as well
140 2018-01-24 15:55:28	0|sipa|okay
141 2018-01-24 15:56:04	0|wumpus|I can't be the only one that really wants a release with segwit wallet out?
142 2018-01-24 15:56:24	0|sipa|no, i'm sure you're not :)
143 2018-01-24 15:56:59	0|wumpus|promag: yes, could be 0.16.1
144 2018-01-24 16:00:54	0|ryanofsky|promag, fyi #12213 nulldummy.py test currently fails
145 2018-01-24 16:00:56	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12213 | Add address type to addmultisigaddress and createmultisig by promag · Pull Request #12213 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
146 2018-01-24 16:01:10	0|instagibbs|there's going to be a lot of cleanup regardless, 0.16.1 is going to happen
147 2018-01-24 16:01:16	0|promag|ryanofsky: ty
148 2018-01-24 16:01:31	0|wumpus|instagibbs: that's true for any major release, though :)
149 2018-01-24 16:03:31	0|instagibbs|I would look through release history to try and disprove, instead i shall just double-down, and log off
150 2018-01-24 16:03:35	0|instagibbs|;)
151 2018-01-24 16:04:17	0|promag|is there anything deprecated in 0.15 to remove?
152 2018-01-24 16:10:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15fwolfst opened pull request #12260: [Trivial] link mentioned scripted-diff-commit (developer-doc) (06master...06LINK_COMMIT_IN_DOC_DEVNOTES) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12260
153 2018-01-24 16:12:37	0|achow101|promag: I think all the currently deprecated things are for removal in 0.17 (except the accounts system)
154 2018-01-24 16:13:10	0|promag|so mark deprectated in X, remove in X+2?
155 2018-01-24 16:13:41	0|wumpus|depends on the feature and the reason for deprecation, so depends on what was discussed at the time of deprecating it
156 2018-01-24 16:14:11	0|achow101|no, the things currently deprecated were marked deprecated for 0.16
157 2018-01-24 16:18:12	0|promag|got it
158 2018-01-24 16:19:52	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #12261: qt: Bump BLOCK_CHAIN_SIZE to 200GB (06master...062018_01_block_chain_size) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12261
159 2018-01-24 16:24:15	0|promag|ryanofsky: fixed segwit
160 2018-01-24 16:24:24	0|promag|^ test =)
161 2018-01-24 16:24:30	0|sipa|that sounds ominous
162 2018-01-24 16:24:38	0|promag|heh
163 2018-01-24 16:26:22	0|promag|wumpus: "Bump BLOCK_CHAIN_SIZE to 200GB" typo there s/_CHAIN//
164 2018-01-24 16:26:56	0|wumpus|promag: noooooooo
165 2018-01-24 16:27:08	0|sipa|hahaha
166 2018-01-24 16:27:09	0|promag|100GB?
167 2018-01-24 16:27:43	0|wumpus|promag: I already had to juggle partitions to fit the current one on my dev machine
168 2018-01-24 16:28:17	0|Chris_Stewart_5|lol.
169 2018-01-24 16:28:58	0|Chris_Stewart_5|we can now fit our entire previous blockchain in two blocks. MUCH THROUGHPUT
170 2018-01-24 16:31:30	0|jcorgan|how about we embed the entire current blockchain in an OP_RETURN of a new genesis block?
171 2018-01-24 16:33:15	0|MarcoFalke|wumpus: What about #12251
172 2018-01-24 16:33:16	0|wumpus|of course, and after that the OP_RETURN policy limit goes from 80 bytes to 80 GB, so it's possible to embed entire DVD images
173 2018-01-24 16:33:17	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12251 | initwallet: Do not translate highly technical addresstype help by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #12251 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
174 2018-01-24 16:33:30	0|MarcoFalke|Asking since you pushed the translations recently
175 2018-01-24 16:33:40	0|promag|jcorgan:  another typo, s/OP_RETURN/javascript
176 2018-01-24 16:34:43	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: I think we should not translate option help messages at all
177 2018-01-24 16:34:48	0|promag|I guess project:bitcoin/bitcoin/8 will be updated in the next days?
178 2018-01-24 16:34:53	0|MarcoFalke|I know you proposed that #10962
179 2018-01-24 16:34:54	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10962 | Stop translating command-line option help? · Issue #10962 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
180 2018-01-24 16:35:07	0|wumpus|but yes it might be too late to do that for 0.16 so I'm ok with your change
181 2018-01-24 16:36:12	0|MarcoFalke|Yeah, I want to save our translators from trying to translate "segwit" or "p2sh"
182 2018-01-24 16:36:41	0|wumpus|agree
183 2018-01-24 16:39:30	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #12262: net: Hardcoded seed update (06master...062018_01_seed_update) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12262
184 2018-01-24 16:42:27	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fa7ecbf 15MarcoFalke: initwallet: Do not translate highly technical addresstype help
185 2018-01-24 16:42:27	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/6e3fe936090d...cc5870a4057f
186 2018-01-24 16:42:28	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14cc5870a 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12251: initwallet: Do not translate highly technical addresstype help...
187 2018-01-24 16:43:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #12251: initwallet: Do not translate highly technical addresstype help (06master...06Mf1801-walletNoTranslateInitHelp) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12251
188 2018-01-24 19:00:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #12264: Fix versionbits warning test (06master...06fix_versionbits_warning_test) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12264
189 2018-01-24 19:01:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/cc5870a4057f...eadb2dacc3c6
190 2018-01-24 19:01:16	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14886a92f 15João Barbosa: [rpc] Add address type option to addmultisigaddress
191 2018-01-24 19:01:16	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f523c6b 15João Barbosa: [qa] Use address type in addmultisigaddress to avoid addwitnessaddress
192 2018-01-24 19:01:17	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14eadb2da 15Jonas Schnelli: Merge #12213: Add address type option to addmultisigaddress...
193 2018-01-24 19:02:05	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli closed pull request #12213: Add address type option to addmultisigaddress (06master...062018-01-addmultisigaddress-address-type) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12213
194 2018-01-24 19:10:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli pushed 4 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/eadb2dacc3c6...7abb0f0929bd
195 2018-01-24 19:10:21	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1431dbd5a 15João Barbosa: [wallet] Add change type to CCoinControl
196 2018-01-24 19:10:21	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14536ddeb 15João Barbosa: [rpc] Add change_type option to fundrawtransaction
197 2018-01-24 19:10:22	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1416f6f59 15João Barbosa: [qa] Test fundrawtransaction with change_type option
198 2018-01-24 19:11:06	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli closed pull request #12194: Add change type option to fundrawtransaction (06master...062018-01-fundrawtransaction-changetype) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12194
199 2018-01-24 19:43:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ba490d2 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Bump BLOCK_CHAIN_SIZE to 200GB...
200 2018-01-24 19:43:13	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7abb0f0929bd...f359afcc4104
201 2018-01-24 19:43:14	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f359afc 15MarcoFalke: Merge #12261: qt: Bump BLOCK_CHAIN_SIZE to 200GB...
202 2018-01-24 19:44:04	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12261: qt: Bump BLOCK_CHAIN_SIZE to 200GB (06master...062018_01_block_chain_size) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12261
203 2018-01-24 20:51:03	0|jonasschnelli|Our sighash tests do not exercise sigversion SIGVERSION_WITNESS_V0?
204 2018-01-24 20:51:28	0|jonasschnelli|Or to ask different, where can I find the testvectors for SIGVERSION_WITNESS_V0 sighash?
205 2018-01-24 20:51:57	0|Chris_Stewart_5|jonasschnelli: Isn't that tested by tx_{in}valid.json?
206 2018-01-24 20:52:22	0|jonasschnelli|Let me check...
207 2018-01-24 20:53:04	0|jonasschnelli|Chris_Stewart_5: I think your right,... was looking for bar sw sighash tests... thanks!
208 2018-01-24 20:55:22	0|Chris_Stewart_5|jonasschnelli: script_tests.json might have simpler tests for the serialization algorithm
209 2018-01-24 20:55:35	0|Chris_Stewart_5|there might be overhead to setting up the tx_valid.json test vectors
210 2018-01-24 21:02:18	0|jonasschnelli|Thanks!