1 2018-06-12 00:22:51 0|sipa|cfields: clang does not like my code :(
2 2018-06-12 00:23:09 0|cfields|sipa: yea, needs a few little fixups...
3 2018-06-12 00:23:33 0|cfields|just template the param, and move the alignof() to the front of the definition
4 2018-06-12 00:24:01 0|cfields|(I assume you knew that, just verifying that it makes clang happy :)
5 2018-06-12 00:25:55 0|sipa|or just get rid of those helper functions
6 2018-06-12 00:26:06 0|sipa|they don't give much abstraction anyway :)
7 2018-06-12 00:30:03 0|cfields|heh
8 2018-06-12 00:31:00 0|cfields|sipa: this includes the optim from #13400. Was that intended?
9 2018-06-12 00:31:02 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13400 | sha256: small speedup for sse4 path. by theuni ÷ Pull Request #13400 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
10 2018-06-12 00:32:00 0|sipa|oh?
11 2018-06-12 00:32:03 0|sipa|no
12 2018-06-12 00:32:36 0|sipa|i don't see that
13 2018-06-12 00:33:44 0|cfields|looking again, maybe order has me confused.
14 2018-06-12 01:04:57 0|phantomcircuit|sipa, the only caller of CCoinsViewDB::BatchWrite seems to be CCoinsViewCache::Flush which calls clear() on cacheCoins after
15 2018-06-12 01:05:31 0|phantomcircuit|but BatchWrite is erasing each entry itself from cacheCoins passed by reference it seems
16 2018-06-12 01:06:35 0|cfields|sipa: https://pastebin.com/raw/H5rV4kM5
17 2018-06-12 01:49:15 0|sipa|phantomcircuit: correct
18 2018-06-12 01:49:56 0|sipa|it's also potentially creating new entries in the parent cache
19 2018-06-12 01:50:15 0|sipa|so to compensate for that memory usage, it also erases on the fly from the other one
20 2018-06-12 01:52:30 0|gmaxwell|sipa: now that you've done intrensics you should be able to specialize the 64byte double sha2
21 2018-06-12 01:52:37 0|gmaxwell|pretty easily?
22 2018-06-12 01:52:46 0|phantomcircuit|sipa, right i see the pr, it's trying to avoid peak memory usage effectively being doubled by caching things twice
23 2018-06-12 01:53:19 0|gmaxwell|(at least the 32-byte specialized version should get heavy use... because of all the places we use double sha2...)
24 2018-06-12 01:53:59 0|sipa|gmaxwell: yup, one thing at a time
25 2018-06-12 01:54:13 0|phantomcircuit|does std::unordered_map::clear() even do anything on an empty map?
26 2018-06-12 01:54:21 0|sipa|no
27 2018-06-12 01:54:51 0|phantomcircuit|ok so that call in Flush() is effectively a noop but makes it clear that it's empty i guess
28 2018-06-12 02:38:23 0|cfields|sipa: hmm, come to think about it, the slowdown occured on AMD when Round() was done on SIMD instructions. Maybe it doesn't pay the same price on integers?
29 2018-06-12 02:39:58 0|cfields|Sigma0/Sigma1, that is.
30 2018-06-12 02:40:59 0|sipa|what slowdown?
31 2018-06-12 02:43:25 0|cfields|sipa: nm, I'll comment on the PR
32 2018-06-12 03:12:57 0|sipa|cfields: fixed, hopefully
33 2018-06-12 03:14:42 0|sipa|cfields: the new Round function in https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/commit/d69a5164f914c6c2945d8f32134faa0da87795f5 makes the benchmark go from 3.68 ms to 4.16 ms
34 2018-06-12 03:17:03 0|cfields|sipa: Mind giving https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/commit/4ee6fbb8b7525988783030eb0799bbc7293d50a0 a try? That's a little less dumb, doesn't force a dependency.
35 2018-06-12 03:17:18 0|sipa|(for me, on i7-7)
36 2018-06-12 03:17:23 0|sipa|sure
37 2018-06-12 03:17:43 0|cfields|sipa: I'm mostly curious to see if it's quicker on AMD.
38 2018-06-12 03:18:43 0|sipa|i'll try the different versions on a Ryzen system too if you want
39 2018-06-12 03:18:53 0|sipa|then again, on those systems we'll likely use SHA-NI instead :)
40 2018-06-12 03:19:05 0|cfields|heh, right
41 2018-06-12 03:19:11 0|cfields|you see what I'm getting at though, right?
42 2018-06-12 04:38:20 0|sipa|cfields: yeah, i'll benchmark on other systems
43 2018-06-12 04:47:50 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15lucash-dev opened pull request #13443: Removed unused == operator from CMutableTransaction. (06master...06remove-CMutableTransaction-equals) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13443
44 2018-06-12 06:00:41 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15edsgerlin opened pull request #13444: depends: bump openssl to 1.0.2o (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13444
45 2018-06-12 07:39:49 0|kallewoof|Maybe I missed it.. do we ask someone to remove the needs rebase tags after we rebase stuff or...?
46 2018-06-12 07:41:41 0|sipa|kallewoof: DrahtBot will remove them when it gets around
47 2018-06-12 07:45:11 0|kallewoof|Oh, it is delayed? Gotcha
48 2018-06-12 07:54:56 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ken2812221 opened pull request #13445: build: Reset default -g -O2 flags when enable debug (06master...06debug_cflags) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13445
49 2018-06-12 07:58:08 0|sipa|kallewoof: it's a bot, it goes through all PRs one by one, it takes a while
50 2018-06-12 07:58:12 0|sipa|MarcoFalke runs it
51 2018-06-12 08:25:42 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ccdle12 closed pull request #13067: [WIP] Unit test sub-directories - Continued (06master...06PR-fixes-ccdle12) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13067
52 2018-06-12 08:27:28 0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: regarding https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12196#issuecomment-394356035 ...
53 2018-06-12 08:27:36 0|jonasschnelli|Is that a pay to pubkey unspent?
54 2018-06-12 08:34:30 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15murrayn opened pull request #13446: Build: remove non-distribution files/directories during make distclean. (06master...06distclean) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13446
55 2018-06-12 11:11:29 0|rafalcpp|wumpus: hm, why are symlinks prohibited from being in Tree-SHA512? they seem to normally work, they are shown as blobs, their git-sha1 is identical for symlinks with same symlink target, and so is sha512 that we get from them
56 2018-06-12 11:17:26 0|rafalcpp|BlueMatt: why we disallow symlinks? (it's your commit be908a69 - Fail merge if there are any symlinks)
57 2018-06-12 11:21:57 0|rafalcpp|it was decided in #9871 to disable them because bitcoin doesn't need them so no need to wonder if we handle them correctly
58 2018-06-12 11:22:00 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9871 | Add a tree sha512 hash to merge commits by sipa ÷ Pull Request #9871 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
59 2018-06-12 11:31:51 0|wumpus|rafalcpp: basic security precaution, we could go into detail analysing the consequences of symlinks (relative, absolute, inside tree, outside tree, etc) or just blanket disallow them. As we don't require them, just disallowing is safer.
60 2018-06-12 11:32:32 0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: could be!
61 2018-06-12 11:33:25 0|wumpus|we don't really *want* symlinks ending up in the repository
62 2018-06-12 11:36:19 0|wumpus|`(they're also not compatible with some OSes)
63 2018-06-12 11:39:29 0|rafalcpp|wumpus: perhaps support for them could exist with --allow-symlinks defaulting to false? Other projects besides bitcoin could benefit from tree sha512
64 2018-06-12 11:40:18 0|wumpus|yes- it could be a git setting that defaults to false. But I don't think it's urgent.
65 2018-06-12 12:02:08 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7c32b414b632...b22115d9a3b0
66 2018-06-12 12:02:09 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14419a198 15practicalswift: docs: Add a note about the source code filename naming convention
67 2018-06-12 12:02:10 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14b22115d 15MarcoFalke: Merge #13312: docs: Add a note about the source code filename naming convention...
68 2018-06-12 12:02:10 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e567713 15practicalswift: Do not use uppercase characters in source code filenames
69 2018-06-12 12:02:53 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #13312: docs: Add a note about the source code filename naming convention (06master...06lowercase-filenames) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13312
70 2018-06-12 12:44:00 0|fanquake|I guess one slightly annoying limitation of the linters is that upstream changes can't be tested in /bitcoin
71 2018-06-12 12:52:34 0|wumpus|yes
72 2018-06-12 12:53:19 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fa8071a 15MarcoFalke: qa: Log as utf-8
73 2018-06-12 12:53:19 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b22115d9a3b0...5315660baef0
74 2018-06-12 12:53:20 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 145315660 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13440: qa: Log as utf-8...
75 2018-06-12 12:54:08 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13440: qa: Log as utf-8 (06master...06Mf1806-qaLogUtf8) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13440
76 2018-06-12 12:56:23 0|fanquake|wumpus See #13444, I don't think that's something we want to do?
77 2018-06-12 12:56:25 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13444 | depends: bump openssl to 1.0.2o by edsgerlin ÷ Pull Request #13444 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
78 2018-06-12 12:58:54 0|wumpus|fanquake: will have a look
79 2018-06-12 13:06:37 0|wumpus|fanquake: so the only thing affected by the OpenSSL version in depends is pretty much qt nowadays, right?
80 2018-06-12 13:07:01 0|wumpus|I tend to agree with you that it is unnecessary
81 2018-06-12 13:07:16 0|wumpus|(assuming that there has been no security issue that necessitates it)
82 2018-06-12 13:08:44 0|fanquake|wumpus Looking at the release notes, basically every major change in the 1.0.2 series is a CVE
83 2018-06-12 13:11:40 0|wumpus|seems like a nightmare to keep track of
84 2018-06-12 13:12:20 0|wumpus|maybe "update to most recent version" isn't that bad an idea, periodically, I don't know...
85 2018-06-12 13:12:44 0|fanquake|tbh I prefer the "drop the requirement for OpenSSL entirely" idea :p
86 2018-06-12 13:13:08 0|fanquake|There have been a few shots at that in the past, but never merged for various reasons.
87 2018-06-12 13:14:56 0|wumpus|for the core it's doable, but dropping the requirement from the GUI doesn't seem feasible to me, besides replacing it with some alternative SSL library (qt supports some) but I'm not sure that's better...
88 2018-06-12 13:16:13 0|wumpus|e.g. on windows, qt can use the native SSL support, so wouldn't strictly need OpenSSL - but that doesn't sound too great to me either...
89 2018-06-12 13:16:39 0|fanquake|Especially given the seeming lack of people we have testing anything on Windows
90 2018-06-12 13:17:52 0|wumpus|that, too
91 2018-06-12 13:18:23 0|wumpus|also the GUI code does some juggling with certificates that doesn't go through the Qt crypto API, so is OpenSSL specific
92 2018-06-12 13:18:36 0|wumpus|it doesn't feel really worth working on
93 2018-06-12 13:20:11 0|wumpus|in a bizarre twist of fate, I was working on a deprecation plan for payment requests, which would have solved this problem once and for all, but then bitpay announced they will *only* support it from then on.
94 2018-06-12 13:20:50 0|fanquake|heh
95 2018-06-12 13:20:54 0|fanquake|I remember that
96 2018-06-12 13:21:41 0|fanquake|#11622
97 2018-06-12 13:21:45 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11622 | build: Add --disable-bip70 configure option by laanwj ÷ Pull Request #11622 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
98 2018-06-12 13:22:01 0|wumpus|that took all of the wind out of my sails in that regard
99 2018-06-12 13:22:11 0|wumpus|yes that one
100 2018-06-12 13:24:28 0|fanquake|I noticed that currently 1/3 of all PRs "need a rebase"
101 2018-06-12 13:29:40 0|wumpus|is:pr is:open -label:"needs rebase"
102 2018-06-12 13:29:59 0|fanquake|that indeed
103 2018-06-12 13:30:25 0|wumpus|or let's go nag some people, at least if it's PRs likely to be merged otherwise
104 2018-06-12 13:32:19 0|wumpus|it looks like most conflicts were caused by build system changes, as well as the txindex refactor
105 2018-06-12 13:36:20 0|fanquake|wumpus: wouldn't dare nag anyone :p
106 2018-06-12 13:37:06 0|wumpus|:p
107 2018-06-12 13:43:54 0|wumpus|any opinions on when we should tag 0.16.1 final?
108 2018-06-12 13:44:55 0|fanquake|Did anything happen for the assert on Windows?
109 2018-06-12 13:46:20 0|wumpus|not that I know of - rc2 was just a translation fix
110 2018-06-12 13:48:41 0|wumpus|you mean #13358? that doesn't seem to be a regression in 0.16.1
111 2018-06-12 13:48:43 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13358 | Assertion failed Error file chain.cpp 102 ÷ Issue #13358 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
112 2018-06-12 13:53:42 0|fanquake|wumpus I thought there was another one on shutdown, but have just installed rc2 onto Windows 10 and no longer see it
113 2018-06-12 13:55:25 0|fanquake|cfields You might be interested, some new output I'm seeing after upgrading to Command Line Tools 10.0 https://0bin.net/paste/2iaLr12c+Q-4rlmS#lexGszZqOKn07pwYKQvTKYGgCBTkDPKGnlCo5PjbGTV
114 2018-06-12 13:56:35 0|fanquake|wumpus #12337
115 2018-06-12 13:56:36 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12337 | 0.16 Shutdown assertion ÷ Issue #12337 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
116 2018-06-12 13:57:01 0|fanquake|However seems like that doesn't need to hold up a 0.16.1
117 2018-06-12 14:35:56 0|jnewbery|Review beg for #13066. We haven't run successfully run the extended tests or verify-commits in Travis for over two months and that would fix it
118 2018-06-12 14:35:58 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13066 | Migrate verify-commits script to python, run in travis by ken2812221 ÷ Pull Request #13066 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
119 2018-06-12 15:15:57 0|wumpus|jnewbery: will take a look
120 2018-06-12 15:18:14 0|wumpus|kind of forgot about that one
121 2018-06-12 15:18:38 0|jnewbery|great. Thanks!
122 2018-06-12 15:19:50 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fa7a6cf 15MarcoFalke: policy: Treat segwit as always active
123 2018-06-12 15:19:50 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5315660baef0...ca2a23387be6
124 2018-06-12 15:19:51 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ca2a233 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13120: policy: Treat segwit as always active...
125 2018-06-12 15:20:35 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13120: policy: Treat segwit as always active (06master...06Mf1805-segwitGenesisPolicy) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13120
126 2018-06-12 15:24:37 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e5b2cd8 15Chun Kuan Lee: Use python instead of slow shell script on verify-commits
127 2018-06-12 15:24:37 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ca2a23387be6...fa4b9065a829
128 2018-06-12 15:24:38 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fa4b906 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13066: Migrate verify-commits script to python, run in travis...
129 2018-06-12 15:25:16 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13066: Migrate verify-commits script to python, run in travis (06master...06verify-commits) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13066
130 2018-06-12 15:27:27 0|BlueMatt|wumpus: errr, did anyone else even review that?
131 2018-06-12 15:27:35 0|BlueMatt|else besides jnewbery, that is
132 2018-06-12 15:27:42 0|wumpus|yes, I reviewed it a long time ago
133 2018-06-12 15:28:06 0|BlueMatt|hmm, can you comment to that effect? I only see a concept ack from you on there
134 2018-06-12 15:28:10 0|wumpus|checked that it still was more or less the same
135 2018-06-12 15:28:34 0|wumpus|you didn't lookv ery well, there's an utACK from me in that topic too
136 2018-06-12 15:28:50 0|wumpus|apr 27
137 2018-06-12 15:29:42 0|BlueMatt|ah, ok, still wish we'd gotten more than 2 reviews with one pretty old on something thats designed to be usable to verify repo consistency
138 2018-06-12 15:30:11 0|wumpus|well at least it makes checking feasible again
139 2018-06-12 15:30:20 0|jnewbery|post-merge reviews welcome :)
140 2018-06-12 15:30:34 0|wumpus|no one was checking because the script was unusably slow
141 2018-06-12 15:30:37 0|BlueMatt|jnewbery: I dont feel comfortable reviewing security python, sadly
142 2018-06-12 15:30:48 0|BlueMatt|yes, indeed, better than it not getting run, which is apparently what was happening :(
143 2018-06-12 15:30:51 0|wumpus|FWIW, I'm 100% more comfortable reviewing python than shell script
144 2018-06-12 15:31:09 0|BlueMatt|heh, yes, I understand I'm like the only one left who prefers bash to python
145 2018-06-12 15:31:10 0|wumpus|there's just too much icky edge cases in shell script for me to be comfortable about it
146 2018-06-12 15:31:27 0|BlueMatt|lets just move everything to C :p
147 2018-06-12 15:31:43 0|wumpus|(like oh no, you forget to use the right quoting, now everything with spaces will escape.. and similar things)
148 2018-06-12 15:31:56 0|wumpus|feel free to rewrite it in C :p
149 2018-06-12 15:32:02 0|wumpus|it'd likely be even faster
150 2018-06-12 15:32:12 0|BlueMatt|lol, then it'd *actually* be usably fast
151 2018-06-12 15:32:15 0|BlueMatt|maybe I'll rewrite it in rust :p
152 2018-06-12 15:32:25 0|wumpus|hehe
153 2018-06-12 15:32:31 0|wumpus|yes that'd be cool
154 2018-06-12 15:32:47 0|BlueMatt|I mean I've got a whole multi-daemon pool server and proxies in rust
155 2018-06-12 15:33:35 0|jnewbery|well, if anyone else knows python well enough to review #13066, I'm sure BlueMatt will appreciate your postmerge ACKs
156 2018-06-12 15:33:38 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13066 | Migrate verify-commits script to python, run in travis by ken2812221 ÷ Pull Request #13066 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
157 2018-06-12 15:34:09 0|wumpus|yes, it's always good to have more review, also of code already merged
158 2018-06-12 15:47:10 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ken2812221 opened pull request #13447: travis: Increase travis_wait time while verifying commits (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13447
159 2018-06-12 15:50:09 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #13448: Add linter: Make sure we explicitly open all text files using UTF-8 encoding in Python (06master...06lint-python-utf8-encoding) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13448
160 2018-06-12 15:52:27 0|promag|#13111 is ready for review
161 2018-06-12 15:52:29 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13111 | Add unloadwallet RPC by promag ÷ Pull Request #13111 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
162 2018-06-12 16:51:39 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fa4b9065a829...a607d23ae82e
163 2018-06-12 16:51:40 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1457ba401 15Pieter Wuille: Enable double-SHA256-for-64-byte code on 32-bit x86
164 2018-06-12 16:51:40 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a607d23 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #13393: Enable double-SHA256-for-64-byte code on 32-bit x86...
165 2018-06-12 16:52:23 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #13393: Enable double-SHA256-for-64-byte code on 32-bit x86 (06master...06201806_dsha256_i386) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13393
166 2018-06-12 17:34:15 0|promag|MarcoFalke: how about a "dormant" label, automatically added for something not updated for X days (either github or git)?
167 2018-06-12 18:12:54 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15instagibbs opened pull request #13449: [WIP] support new multisig template in wallet for Solver, signing, and signââ¬Â¦ (06master...06largemultisig) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13449
168 2018-06-12 18:29:28 0|luke-jr|#12859 seems to not be in 0.16.1 rc2?
169 2018-06-12 18:29:29 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12859 | Bugfix: Include for std::unique_ptr by luke-jr ÷ Pull Request #12859 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
170 2018-06-12 18:41:28 0|luke-jr|wumpus: ^
171 2018-06-12 19:31:37 0|wumpus|luke-jr: it was also not tagged as such
172 2018-06-12 19:33:30 0|wumpus|you could have mentioned it, at least
173 2018-06-12 19:33:39 0|luke-jr|just did
174 2018-06-12 19:36:44 0|luke-jr|seems like Ubuntu doesn't have Qt 5.10 yet, but Debian testing does
175 2018-06-12 19:37:16 0|luke-jr|dunno how to check Fedora
176 2018-06-12 19:38:01 0|luke-jr|Arch has 5.11
177 2018-06-12 20:02:08 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #13450: Add linter: Enforce the source code file naming convention described in the developer notes (06master...06lint-filenames) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13450
178 2018-06-12 20:46:38 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15instagibbs opened pull request #13451: expose CBlockIndex::nTx in getblockheader (06master...06expose_nTx) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13451
179 2018-06-12 20:51:28 0|luke-jr|#13120 should probably be backported too
180 2018-06-12 20:51:30 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13120 | policy: Treat segwit as always active by MarcoFalke ÷ Pull Request #13120 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
181 2018-06-12 20:52:06 0|luke-jr|perhaps simplified
182 2018-06-12 21:15:34 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15instagibbs opened pull request #13452: have verifytxoutproof check the number of txns in proof structure (06master...06actuallyverifytxoutproof) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13452