12018-11-08T00:12:28 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22018-11-08T00:18:07 *** bitconner has quit IRC
32018-11-08T00:18:09 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
42018-11-08T00:22:55 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
52018-11-08T00:24:33 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62018-11-08T00:28:48 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
72018-11-08T00:31:26 *** Murch has quit IRC
82018-11-08T00:36:35 *** jarthur_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
92018-11-08T00:37:12 *** bitconner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102018-11-08T00:37:37 *** vefuwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112018-11-08T00:38:47 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122018-11-08T00:39:44 *** jarthur has quit IRC
132018-11-08T00:41:00 *** jarthur_ has quit IRC
142018-11-08T00:46:47 <vefuwell> hello
152018-11-08T00:51:03 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162018-11-08T00:51:18 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
172018-11-08T00:53:51 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182018-11-08T00:54:11 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00_ has quit IRC
192018-11-08T00:54:38 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202018-11-08T00:59:26 *** Murch has quit IRC
212018-11-08T01:20:49 *** jarthur has quit IRC
222018-11-08T01:21:17 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232018-11-08T01:29:37 *** vefuwell has quit IRC
242018-11-08T01:35:30 *** drexl has quit IRC
252018-11-08T01:36:48 *** Zenton has quit IRC
262018-11-08T01:36:57 *** Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272018-11-08T01:37:04 *** promag has quit IRC
282018-11-08T01:54:17 *** Deacyde has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292018-11-08T02:03:02 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
302018-11-08T02:04:07 *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312018-11-08T02:04:48 *** Deacyde has quit IRC
322018-11-08T02:08:49 *** deaunapaul has quit IRC
332018-11-08T02:08:49 *** recover_ has quit IRC
342018-11-08T02:08:49 *** recover__ has quit IRC
352018-11-08T02:08:49 *** recover has quit IRC
362018-11-08T02:21:02 *** CodeBlue1776 has quit IRC
372018-11-08T02:21:32 *** CodeBlue1776 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
382018-11-08T02:29:06 *** jarthur has quit IRC
392018-11-08T02:29:49 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402018-11-08T02:35:17 <sipa> \
412018-11-08T02:37:01 <gwillen> /
422018-11-08T02:39:45 <gmaxwell> O/
432018-11-08T02:49:23 <luke-jr> =
442018-11-08T02:53:21 <phantomcircuit> \/O/=
452018-11-08T02:55:28 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
462018-11-08T02:57:44 <luke-jr> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11082#issuecomment-436803389
472018-11-08T03:00:03 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
482018-11-08T03:31:42 *** [b__b] has quit IRC
492018-11-08T04:18:02 *** Tralfaz has quit IRC
502018-11-08T04:18:09 <mryandao> o.O
512018-11-08T04:18:12 *** Tralfaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522018-11-08T04:28:07 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
532018-11-08T04:56:29 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542018-11-08T05:01:02 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
552018-11-08T05:26:02 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
562018-11-08T05:27:08 *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572018-11-08T05:28:48 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
582018-11-08T05:33:30 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
592018-11-08T05:34:54 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602018-11-08T05:39:56 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
612018-11-08T05:40:11 *** jimpo_ has quit IRC
622018-11-08T05:40:32 *** jimpo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
632018-11-08T05:41:13 *** CodeBlue1776 has quit IRC
642018-11-08T05:41:49 *** CodeBlue1776 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652018-11-08T06:01:13 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662018-11-08T06:05:30 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
672018-11-08T06:06:41 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
682018-11-08T06:31:21 *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
692018-11-08T06:31:31 *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
702018-11-08T06:45:58 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
712018-11-08T06:47:54 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
722018-11-08T06:48:03 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
732018-11-08T06:48:03 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
742018-11-08T06:51:56 <jimpo> jamesob Hey, sorry, been busy recently. I just rebased #14121
752018-11-08T06:51:59 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14121 | Index for BIP 157 block filters by jimpo · Pull Request #14121 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
762018-11-08T06:52:44 <jimpo> #14172 is a subset of that one which should be a pretty quick review (<100 lines)
772018-11-08T06:52:45 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14172 | Refactor and add tests for BlockFilter construction by jimpo · Pull Request #14172 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
782018-11-08T07:11:46 *** bitconner has quit IRC
792018-11-08T07:26:44 *** falcoman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
802018-11-08T07:26:50 <falcoman> There is a community that driven project which is not doing any ICO
812018-11-08T07:26:52 <falcoman> and has a big vision of eliminating poverty in the world by
822018-11-08T07:26:56 <falcoman> providing everyone Basic Income.
832018-11-08T07:26:58 <falcoman> Currently you can signup for their airdrop where you get 100 FREE
842018-11-08T07:27:00 <falcoman> tokens daily and each token is valued by community at $1 so
852018-11-08T07:27:02 <falcoman> basically $100 Free Daily Income
862018-11-08T07:27:04 <falcoman> sign up here for free http://basicincome.network/mariaassunta
872018-11-08T07:27:58 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o luke-jr
882018-11-08T07:28:00 *** falcoman was kicked by luke-jr (User terminated!)
892018-11-08T07:28:09 *** luke-jr sets mode: +b *!*@dynamic-adsl-78-13-44-22.clienti.tiscali.it
902018-11-08T07:28:10 *** luke-jr sets mode: -o luke-jr
912018-11-08T08:17:48 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
922018-11-08T08:31:00 *** harrymm has quit IRC
932018-11-08T08:31:37 *** jarthur has quit IRC
942018-11-08T08:34:01 *** phwalkr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
952018-11-08T08:39:57 *** IGHOR has quit IRC
962018-11-08T08:40:16 <meshcollider> luke-jr: you already have #14532 on high-priority, are you sure you're allowed another ;)
972018-11-08T08:40:18 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14532 | Never bind INADDR_ANY by default, and warn when doing so explicitly by luke-jr · Pull Request #14532 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
982018-11-08T08:41:05 *** IGHOR has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
992018-11-08T08:44:25 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002018-11-08T08:46:42 <luke-jr> meshcollider: probably not, forgot about that one XD
1012018-11-08T08:46:47 <luke-jr> guess it will have to wait
1022018-11-08T08:46:51 <meshcollider> instagibbs: what do you mean by "xpub byte prefix mismatch" in the descriptor import PR? Mismatch with what?
1032018-11-08T08:56:05 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042018-11-08T09:01:24 *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1052018-11-08T09:03:50 <sipa> meshcollider: i assume if you try a testnet xpub on mainnet etc
1062018-11-08T09:09:05 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1072018-11-08T09:10:35 *** Thnhfntuntunut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082018-11-08T09:14:51 *** Thnhfntuntunut has quit IRC
1092018-11-08T09:18:47 *** harrymm has quit IRC
1102018-11-08T09:28:26 *** far has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112018-11-08T09:30:15 *** far has quit IRC
1122018-11-08T09:32:06 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132018-11-08T09:34:13 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142018-11-08T09:36:04 *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152018-11-08T09:44:53 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162018-11-08T09:45:19 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
1172018-11-08T10:06:46 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1182018-11-08T10:31:08 *** shesek has quit IRC
1192018-11-08T10:31:33 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202018-11-08T10:32:13 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212018-11-08T10:37:31 *** jarthur has quit IRC
1222018-11-08T10:39:56 *** spinza has quit IRC
1232018-11-08T10:45:08 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242018-11-08T10:58:27 *** shesek has quit IRC
1252018-11-08T10:58:45 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262018-11-08T11:16:35 *** e4xit has quit IRC
1272018-11-08T11:35:48 *** spinza has quit IRC
1282018-11-08T11:44:28 *** e4xit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292018-11-08T11:47:33 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302018-11-08T11:54:03 *** spinza has quit IRC
1312018-11-08T11:55:21 *** ken2812221 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322018-11-08T11:59:31 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332018-11-08T12:05:16 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1342018-11-08T12:05:16 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] mruddy opened pull request #14687: zmq: enable tcp keepalive (master...zmq-keep-alive) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14687
1352018-11-08T12:05:16 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1362018-11-08T12:06:29 *** kadich has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372018-11-08T12:09:07 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382018-11-08T12:25:28 *** Ramis_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1392018-11-08T12:25:46 <Ramis_> Hello, nice to meet you all, i have a question, can someone tell me if i can change mycoin value from basecli ? i am learning tendermint so was wondering am i able to alter the value of my wallet without sending/receiving,without altering any file through the basecli command is it possible ?
1402018-11-08T12:30:44 *** _cryptosignal_me has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1412018-11-08T12:30:54 <_cryptosignal_me> Hello Everybody
1422018-11-08T12:32:22 <_cryptosignal_me> aj
1432018-11-08T12:33:26 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442018-11-08T12:33:43 *** shesek has quit IRC
1452018-11-08T12:36:21 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1462018-11-08T12:36:21 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1472018-11-08T12:38:16 *** jarthur has quit IRC
1482018-11-08T12:40:01 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
1492018-11-08T12:41:33 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1502018-11-08T12:43:08 *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512018-11-08T12:44:02 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
1522018-11-08T12:44:03 *** promag has quit IRC
1532018-11-08T12:45:09 *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1542018-11-08T12:45:16 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
1552018-11-08T12:46:32 *** shesek has quit IRC
1562018-11-08T12:46:49 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1572018-11-08T12:46:58 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582018-11-08T12:46:58 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1592018-11-08T12:47:13 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
1602018-11-08T12:48:21 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1612018-11-08T12:48:29 *** timothy has quit IRC
1622018-11-08T12:48:48 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1632018-11-08T12:50:19 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642018-11-08T12:56:37 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
1652018-11-08T12:57:20 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662018-11-08T12:58:20 *** Ramis_ has quit IRC
1672018-11-08T13:05:59 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1682018-11-08T13:08:07 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1692018-11-08T13:13:24 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1702018-11-08T13:15:27 *** timothy has quit IRC
1712018-11-08T13:27:41 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722018-11-08T13:31:55 *** josephnicholas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732018-11-08T13:37:36 *** shesek has quit IRC
1742018-11-08T13:40:25 *** JackH has quit IRC
1752018-11-08T13:45:57 *** josephnicholas has quit IRC
1762018-11-08T13:51:14 <instagibbs> sipa, right, xpub vs tpub
1772018-11-08T13:51:42 <instagibbs> see https://github.com/achow101/HWI/pull/47#issuecomment-436800857
1782018-11-08T13:55:41 *** ken2812221 has quit IRC
1792018-11-08T13:55:51 *** josephnicholas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1802018-11-08T14:00:42 *** josephnicholas has quit IRC
1812018-11-08T14:02:01 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
1822018-11-08T14:02:01 *** wxss has quit IRC
1832018-11-08T14:02:01 *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
1842018-11-08T14:02:01 *** jimpo has quit IRC
1852018-11-08T14:02:02 *** dqx has quit IRC
1862018-11-08T14:02:02 *** instagibbs has quit IRC
1872018-11-08T14:02:02 *** niska has quit IRC
1882018-11-08T14:02:02 *** booyah has quit IRC
1892018-11-08T14:02:02 *** cryptapus has quit IRC
1902018-11-08T14:02:02 *** tripleslash has quit IRC
1912018-11-08T14:02:02 *** gwillen has quit IRC
1922018-11-08T14:02:02 *** roasbeef has quit IRC
1932018-11-08T14:02:02 *** davec has quit IRC
1942018-11-08T14:02:02 *** so has quit IRC
1952018-11-08T14:02:02 *** opdenkamp has quit IRC
1962018-11-08T14:02:02 *** treyzania has quit IRC
1972018-11-08T14:02:09 *** roasbeef_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1982018-11-08T14:02:14 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1992018-11-08T14:02:15 *** treyzania has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002018-11-08T14:02:22 *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2012018-11-08T14:02:22 *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2022018-11-08T14:02:40 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2032018-11-08T14:02:44 *** opdenkamp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042018-11-08T14:02:52 *** gwollon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2052018-11-08T14:03:11 *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2062018-11-08T14:03:15 *** opdenkamp has quit IRC
2072018-11-08T14:03:15 *** opdenkamp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2082018-11-08T14:03:17 *** cryptapus has quit IRC
2092018-11-08T14:03:18 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2102018-11-08T14:03:20 *** niska has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2112018-11-08T14:03:45 *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2122018-11-08T14:04:04 *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132018-11-08T14:04:31 *** so has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2142018-11-08T14:04:34 *** jimpo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2152018-11-08T14:06:12 *** dlerario has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162018-11-08T14:06:27 *** josephnicholas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172018-11-08T14:06:44 *** CodeBlue1776 has quit IRC
2182018-11-08T14:07:06 *** CodeBlue1776 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2192018-11-08T14:07:26 *** dqx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202018-11-08T14:07:47 *** josephnicholas has quit IRC
2212018-11-08T14:11:50 *** josephnicholas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2222018-11-08T14:12:44 *** as1nc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2232018-11-08T14:14:34 *** josephnicholas has quit IRC
2242018-11-08T14:15:01 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2252018-11-08T14:19:48 *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262018-11-08T14:23:34 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272018-11-08T14:23:35 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] harding opened pull request #14688: Doc: update release notes for changes since 0.17.0 branch (master...2018-11-release-notes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14688
2282018-11-08T14:23:35 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2292018-11-08T14:24:28 *** josephnicholas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2302018-11-08T14:29:28 *** josephnicholas has quit IRC
2312018-11-08T14:31:35 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2322018-11-08T14:34:17 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332018-11-08T14:37:40 *** josephnicholas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2342018-11-08T14:38:44 *** jarthur has quit IRC
2352018-11-08T14:39:04 *** josephnicholas has quit IRC
2362018-11-08T14:55:55 *** _cryptosignal_me has quit IRC
2372018-11-08T14:56:07 *** timothy has quit IRC
2382018-11-08T15:00:37 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2392018-11-08T15:01:13 *** _cryptosignal_me has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2402018-11-08T15:05:15 *** setpill has quit IRC
2412018-11-08T15:06:52 *** harding has quit IRC
2422018-11-08T15:07:51 *** harding has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432018-11-08T15:15:27 *** _cryptosignal_me has quit IRC
2442018-11-08T15:15:35 *** _cryptosignal_me has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452018-11-08T15:16:44 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2462018-11-08T15:16:44 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #14689: Require a public key to be retrieved when signing a P2PKH input (master...fix-pkh-pubkeys) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14689
2472018-11-08T15:16:44 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2482018-11-08T15:17:01 <achow101> instagibbs: provoostenator: ^
2492018-11-08T15:19:16 *** _cryptosignal_me has quit IRC
2502018-11-08T15:19:30 *** _cryptosignal_me has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512018-11-08T15:23:44 *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522018-11-08T15:26:01 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2532018-11-08T15:31:17 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2542018-11-08T15:31:46 <promag> jonasschnelli: are you still working on #7949?
2552018-11-08T15:31:49 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7949 | [RPC] Add RPC long poll notifications by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #7949 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2562018-11-08T15:32:03 <promag> or plan to?
2572018-11-08T15:37:13 <jamesob> Hey, you around?
2582018-11-08T15:37:22 <jamesob> oops - wrong window :)
2592018-11-08T15:42:48 *** promag has quit IRC
2602018-11-08T15:44:48 *** Tralfaz has quit IRC
2612018-11-08T15:45:40 *** as1nc has quit IRC
2622018-11-08T15:45:51 *** ricardobessa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2632018-11-08T15:46:19 *** as1nc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642018-11-08T15:47:07 *** _cryptosignal_me has quit IRC
2652018-11-08T16:00:39 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2662018-11-08T16:03:04 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
2672018-11-08T16:04:19 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2682018-11-08T16:05:00 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
2692018-11-08T16:09:07 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702018-11-08T16:09:07 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] conscott opened pull request #14691: Speedup feature_pruning test and refactor big transaction logic (master...2018_11_opreturn_splices) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14691
2712018-11-08T16:09:07 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2722018-11-08T16:16:34 *** _cryptosignal_me has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732018-11-08T16:28:54 *** phwalkr has quit IRC
2742018-11-08T16:29:27 *** phwalkr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2752018-11-08T16:32:25 *** drexl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2762018-11-08T16:32:55 *** belcher has quit IRC
2772018-11-08T16:34:04 *** phwalkr has quit IRC
2782018-11-08T16:35:19 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2792018-11-08T16:38:30 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802018-11-08T16:39:41 *** jarthur has quit IRC
2812018-11-08T16:51:16 *** as1nc has quit IRC
2822018-11-08T16:52:09 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2832018-11-08T16:55:12 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2842018-11-08T16:59:39 *** jarthur has quit IRC
2852018-11-08T17:05:11 *** dlerario has quit IRC
2862018-11-08T17:11:23 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2872018-11-08T17:15:18 *** ken2812221 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2882018-11-08T17:17:08 *** _cryptosignal_me has quit IRC
2892018-11-08T17:17:46 *** mistergold has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2902018-11-08T17:25:18 *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
2912018-11-08T17:29:53 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2922018-11-08T17:31:29 <provoostenator> Drahbot says "The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata" -> "No conflicts as of last run"
2932018-11-08T17:31:45 <provoostenator> Maybe it should hold off on posting its first comment until there's something to say?
2942018-11-08T17:38:54 *** ExtraCrispy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2952018-11-08T17:40:28 *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962018-11-08T17:42:43 *** dlerario has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972018-11-08T17:51:04 *** dlerario has quit IRC
2982018-11-08T17:53:47 *** Tralfaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2992018-11-08T17:58:29 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3002018-11-08T17:58:30 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e52781067bb4...e70a19e7132d
3012018-11-08T17:58:30 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa4da3c MarcoFalke: [doc] conf: Remove deprecated options from docs, Other cleanup...
3022018-11-08T17:58:31 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e70a19e MarcoFalke: Merge #14684: [doc] conf: Remove deprecated options from docs, Other cleanup...
3032018-11-08T17:58:31 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3042018-11-08T17:59:34 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3052018-11-08T17:59:34 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #14684: [doc] conf: Remove deprecated options from docs, Other cleanup (master...Mf1609-trivialPre14) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14684
3062018-11-08T17:59:34 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3072018-11-08T18:01:37 <esotericnonsense> promag: hmm. it seems to me like what should probably happen is rip out zmq and replace it with that. it feels bizarre to have multiple notification mechanisms.
3082018-11-08T18:02:34 <esotericnonsense> the 'subscribe/unsubscribe' layer also feels like perhaps making RPC more complex/stateful than it needs to be, if this is someone's specific use case can't they just do it?
3092018-11-08T18:02:36 *** jarthur has quit IRC
3102018-11-08T18:02:46 <promag> I don't think we should throw away zmq though
3112018-11-08T18:02:48 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3122018-11-08T18:03:02 <esotericnonsense> i'll be looking in to this stuff a bit in the next few days I think, but I suspect what I'll be doing is just using the existing mechanisms through a proxy
3132018-11-08T18:03:42 <esotericnonsense> i.e. you have bitcoind <-> bitcoind-api-i-actually-want-for-my-program <-> consumer(s)
3142018-11-08T18:04:10 <esotericnonsense> promag: neither do I, actually I think it should just go through zmq :P
3152018-11-08T18:04:36 <esotericnonsense> (e.g. in the hashtx hashblock case - just write another thing that does it)
3162018-11-08T18:04:50 <sipa> but ZMQ is unreliable?
3172018-11-08T18:05:19 <esotericnonsense> lol
3182018-11-08T18:05:22 * esotericnonsense has deja vu
3192018-11-08T18:05:46 <esotericnonsense> i feel like the last time I was here something like a year ago we had the same discussion and sequence numbers and other solutions came up
3202018-11-08T18:05:53 <sipa> hah
3212018-11-08T18:06:06 <esotericnonsense> the whole thing very much feels like a "who actually wants to use this" thing
3222018-11-08T18:06:23 <esotericnonsense> i.e. if you have a use case for it, implement it
3232018-11-08T18:07:07 <promag> I just asked if jonasschnelli was planning to update his PR :P
3242018-11-08T18:07:26 <esotericnonsense> hehe
3252018-11-08T18:08:14 <esotericnonsense> if I actually get to the point of my RPC proxy being usable it might be informative, because it does look like at the moment I might end up just using every different RPC interface together and combining them all into a rest api
3262018-11-08T18:08:48 <esotericnonsense> but I'm kind of lazy and would probably just hack around weirdnesses in bitcoind rather than fix them (because I don't actually know what a fix looks like for anyone other than me)
3272018-11-08T18:10:22 *** timothy has quit IRC
3282018-11-08T18:13:56 *** dlerario has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3292018-11-08T18:16:12 *** promag has quit IRC
3302018-11-08T18:18:45 <ezzzy> would you people suggest en.bitcoin.it or bitcoin.org as a reference for the protocol (for client implementors)?
3312018-11-08T18:21:36 <esotericnonsense> ezzzy: for the p2p protocol I'd suggest the code itself since any re-implementation has a hard requirement of being bug-for-bug compatible
3322018-11-08T18:22:49 <sipa> esotericnonsense: only if you reimplement consensus rules (which I'd advise against)
3332018-11-08T18:23:03 <sipa> but implementing the P2P protocol... follow the bitcoin.org developer docs
3342018-11-08T18:23:24 <MarcoFalke> [12:31] <provoostenator> Maybe it should hold off on posting its first comment until there's something to say?
3352018-11-08T18:23:31 <ezzzy> this is for educational purposes so I'd like to reimplement the consensus rules too
3362018-11-08T18:23:35 <MarcoFalke> I have the feeling this is going back and forth
3372018-11-08T18:23:50 <sipa> ezzzy: what do you hope to learn? all the nitty details of exactly which opcode does what?
3382018-11-08T18:24:11 <MarcoFalke> But since GitHub will update the most recently changed when someone edits a comment I think I can change it back to only create the comment when there is information
3392018-11-08T18:24:14 <sipa> my personal belief is that contributing to an existing project is a far more useful learning experience
3402018-11-08T18:24:55 <MarcoFalke> Also: 6:21 PM ( Time in ReykjavÃk, Iceland )
3412018-11-08T18:25:33 <instagibbs> what is the meeting time again, in Reyk time
3422018-11-08T18:26:50 <sipa> Meeting in half an hour.
3432018-11-08T18:28:10 <sipa> that's the email presumably? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrZpk4JWkAALYK4.jpg:large
3442018-11-08T18:28:17 <sipa> oops, wrong window
3452018-11-08T18:28:32 <instagibbs> and the wallet meeting?
3462018-11-08T18:28:42 <sipa> instagibbs: every two weeks
3472018-11-08T18:28:48 <sipa> 24 hours after the other one
3482018-11-08T18:28:56 <sipa> this week there is not one
3492018-11-08T18:29:11 <ezzzy> sipa: I think there's a lot to learn in the process since it involves cryptography, network protocols, p2p, databases, testing all of the above etc.
3502018-11-08T18:29:37 <sipa> ezzzy: well, good luck :)
3512018-11-08T18:29:43 <ezzzy> thx :)
3522018-11-08T18:32:20 <sipa> instagibbs: so 7 pm UTC
3532018-11-08T18:32:25 <sipa> is the meeting time always
3542018-11-08T18:33:57 *** shesek has quit IRC
3552018-11-08T18:38:04 <ezzzy> do you suggest using testnet or is there better alternatives for testing new implementations?
3562018-11-08T18:39:22 <sipa> ezzzy: off topic here, as this channel is about bitcoin core specifically, but you may find help on https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com
3572018-11-08T18:39:50 <ezzzy> cool, thx
3582018-11-08T18:46:27 <MarcoFalke> #14437 has some conflicts (none with high priority), so I'd like to merge it after maybe 1-2 more reviews before it gets stale again
3592018-11-08T18:46:29 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14437 | Refactor: Start to separate wallet from node by ryanofsky · Pull Request #14437 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3602018-11-08T19:00:02 <sipa> meetime?
3612018-11-08T19:00:04 <wumpus> #startmeeting
3622018-11-08T19:00:04 <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Nov 8 19:00:04 2018 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
3632018-11-08T19:00:04 <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
3642018-11-08T19:00:08 *** grafcaps has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3652018-11-08T19:00:17 <provoostenator> hi
3662018-11-08T19:00:19 <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
3672018-11-08T19:00:25 <instagibbs> hi
3682018-11-08T19:00:47 <wumpus> topic proposals?
3692018-11-08T19:01:12 <sipa> suggested topic: utility vs rpc? (#14671)
3702018-11-08T19:01:14 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14671 | Utility to replace RPC calls that dont need wallet or chain context · Issue #14671 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3712018-11-08T19:01:23 <achow101> hi
3722018-11-08T19:01:29 <wumpus> yes that's a good one, that comes up very often
3732018-11-08T19:02:02 <luke-jr> preferably a separate repo entirely IMO
3742018-11-08T19:02:03 <sipa> suggested topic: [RFC] for future of RNG #14623
3752018-11-08T19:02:04 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14623 | [RFC] Built-in RNG design · Issue #14623 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3762018-11-08T19:02:05 <meshcollider> hi
3772018-11-08T19:02:38 <wumpus> #topic high priority for review
3782018-11-08T19:02:44 <phantomcircuit> hi
3792018-11-08T19:02:56 <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8 anything to add or remove?
3802018-11-08T19:03:14 <wumpus> luke-jr achow101 phantomcircuit sipa ryanofsky currently have open PRs there
3812018-11-08T19:03:15 <provoostenator> Some of the hardware wallet support would be nice to add, e.g. the overhaul PR by sipa.
3822018-11-08T19:03:27 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3832018-11-08T19:03:31 <luke-jr> well, I rebased rwconf (#11082), but now #14532 is in the way :x
3842018-11-08T19:03:33 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11082 | Add new bitcoin_rw.conf file that is used for settings modified by this software itself by luke-jr · Pull Request #11082 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3852018-11-08T19:03:35 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14532 | Never bind INADDR_ANY by default, and warn when doing so explicitly by luke-jr · Pull Request #14532 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3862018-11-08T19:03:39 <wumpus> he already has #14477
3872018-11-08T19:03:40 *** gwollon is now known as gwillen
3882018-11-08T19:03:41 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14477 | Add ability to convert solvability info to descriptor by sipa · Pull Request #14477 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3892018-11-08T19:03:54 <provoostenator> luke-jr I'll review that one soonish, as well as rebase my work on top of it.
3902018-11-08T19:04:01 <sipa> i think of my PRs, 14646 is probably blocking more
3912018-11-08T19:04:16 <sipa> #14646
3922018-11-08T19:04:18 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14646 | Add expansion cache functions to descriptors (unused for now) by sipa · Pull Request #14646 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3932018-11-08T19:04:18 <wumpus> ok, will replace it
3942018-11-08T19:04:25 <phantomcircuit> sdaftuar found a bug in #14336 on os x (which i think is fixed now), think it needs some more testing there
3952018-11-08T19:04:28 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14336 | net: implement poll by pstratem · Pull Request #14336 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3962018-11-08T19:04:44 <sipa> wumpus: thanks
3972018-11-08T19:04:44 <promag> hi
3982018-11-08T19:05:14 <jnewbery> hi
3992018-11-08T19:05:18 <wumpus> #action test PR 14336 on OSX
4002018-11-08T19:06:05 <wumpus> anything else?
4012018-11-08T19:06:55 <promag> wumpus: 13501
4022018-11-08T19:06:58 <wumpus> ok, time for next topic I guess
4032018-11-08T19:07:14 <wumpus> #13501
4042018-11-08T19:07:16 <instagibbs> not exactly a topic, but ##hwi in case people want to contribute to or lurk hww support work
4052018-11-08T19:07:18 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13501 | ~~Correctly~~ terminate HTTP server by promag · Pull Request #13501 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4062018-11-08T19:07:45 <wumpus> #action join ##hwi to contribute to or lurk hardware wallet support work
4072018-11-08T19:07:48 <promag> ops not that
4082018-11-08T19:07:58 <promag> #14670
4092018-11-08T19:08:00 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14670 | http: Fix HTTP server shutdown by promag · Pull Request #14670 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4102018-11-08T19:08:06 <meshcollider> Quick topic: EOL date for 0.15 https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/630
4112018-11-08T19:08:19 <wumpus> ok added
4122018-11-08T19:08:28 *** Krellan has quit IRC
4132018-11-08T19:08:40 <wumpus> #topic RPC or utility?
4142018-11-08T19:08:48 <sipa> provoostenator, MarcoFalke ^
4152018-11-08T19:08:52 <MarcoFalke> Just to repeat my latest comment there: Many users already have bitcoind running and don't care about performance, so I don't see why we'd want to stop providing utility functions for them.
4162018-11-08T19:08:59 <wumpus> most recently this came up in #14667
4172018-11-08T19:09:00 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14667 | Add deriveaddress RPC util method by Sjors · Pull Request #14667 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4182018-11-08T19:09:01 <MarcoFalke> If we want to (in addition) provide a high-performance library or executable for those functions, that seems partly orthogonal. And maybe even out of scope for our project?
4192018-11-08T19:09:09 <achow101> why not both?
4202018-11-08T19:09:15 <promag> +1 achow101
4212018-11-08T19:09:17 <wumpus> and #14476
4222018-11-08T19:09:20 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14476 | RPC method encodescript by mrwhythat · Pull Request #14476 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4232018-11-08T19:09:30 <wumpus> achow101: it complicates bitcoind, more code to maintain, more API to support
4242018-11-08T19:09:35 <MarcoFalke> achow101: Sure, but has a bit of maintanence overhead
4252018-11-08T19:09:36 <instagibbs> are existing utils well-tested and used?
4262018-11-08T19:09:37 <provoostenator> I agree that performance really isn't an issue for at least some users. There's a reason people run NodeJS :-)
4272018-11-08T19:09:40 <promag> bitcoin-qt already exposes RPC functionality without network overhead
4282018-11-08T19:09:43 <wumpus> more testing as well; API coverage is not free
4292018-11-08T19:10:04 <wumpus> I don't think performance is the only consideration
4302018-11-08T19:10:14 <sipa> wumpus: but what about code that we already have, which can be used to implement a useful function, but would require a lot of work to reimplement elsewhere?
4312018-11-08T19:10:33 <wumpus> sipa: it removes the flexibility to change that code later I guess
4322018-11-08T19:10:34 <luke-jr> preferably a separate repo entirely IMO
4332018-11-08T19:10:38 <sipa> say, signing PSBT with a descriptor
4342018-11-08T19:10:40 <MarcoFalke> Also, I guess there'd be design tradeoffs that make the library/executable usable by some and not by others, so maybe just too much to worry about for us?
4352018-11-08T19:11:06 <provoostenator> I think there's two seperate questions: 1) do we want a sep. utility 2) do we want to deprecate / stop adding that stuff to the RPC
4362018-11-08T19:11:24 <sipa> descriptors are a bitcoin core specific thing (at least for now), it would be trivial amount of code to implement given the existing infrastructure, but a lot of work to do elsewhere
4372018-11-08T19:11:26 <jnewbery> I think having duplicate code that does basically the same thing can be problematic. We've already had issues where bitcoin-tx has fallen out of sync with the equivalent RPC methods.
4382018-11-08T19:11:30 <provoostenator> I would say (1) would be nice in general, even in a seperate repo. I'm a bit reluctant about (2) for reasons Marco pointed to.
4392018-11-08T19:11:31 <wumpus> I mean obviously the ship to have bitcoind be a minimal consensus node implementation sailed, but I'm not sure we should be tacking on more that *could* be implemented outside it and is independent on any node functionality
4402018-11-08T19:11:39 <MarcoFalke> 2) NACK on stop adding utility to RPC
4412018-11-08T19:11:51 <wumpus> but I'm sure this is pointless for me to argue
4422018-11-08T19:11:53 <promag> also nack 2
4432018-11-08T19:11:56 <wumpus> so do whatever you want..
4442018-11-08T19:12:08 <phantomcircuit> MarcoFalke, most of the utility like things can trivially be RPC and some utility binary
4452018-11-08T19:12:35 <MarcoFalke> For 1) it is not even clear if it should be a util binary or a util library
4462018-11-08T19:12:36 <phantomcircuit> it's quite a nuisance to implement lots of things as another project, if only because of serialization stuff
4472018-11-08T19:12:41 <provoostenator> It would be good to have a _generic_ way to map utility functions to RPC functions, so that it's easy to keep well tested.
4482018-11-08T19:12:44 <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: library + utility
4492018-11-08T19:12:51 <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: see libbase58 for example
4502018-11-08T19:12:54 <provoostenator> Right now every RPC is bespoke.
4512018-11-08T19:13:10 <esotericnonsense> butting in. this is more of a wallet vs node implementation thing than a RPC vs node thing, right.
4522018-11-08T19:13:36 <sipa> esotericnonsense: we're talking about RPCs that don't need a wallet or node/chainstate/blocks
4532018-11-08T19:13:41 <phantomcircuit> esotericnonsense, there's lots of non-wallet utility rpc's
4542018-11-08T19:13:57 <MarcoFalke> Neither wallet, nore node, since both have state. We are talking about stateless util functions
4552018-11-08T19:14:01 <esotericnonsense> sure, i suppose what i'm saying is that they're more wallet-like than node-like (if they deal with transactions, signing, etc)
4562018-11-08T19:14:11 <sipa> esotericnonsense: maybe
4572018-11-08T19:14:16 <wumpus> maybe, but AFAIK they're also enabled with the wallet disabled
4582018-11-08T19:14:31 <wumpus> always compiled in
4592018-11-08T19:14:32 <sipa> decodescript is pretty independent of anything
4602018-11-08T19:14:40 <wumpus> yes
4612018-11-08T19:14:43 <MarcoFalke> say, decoding a transactions, has nothing to do with wallet imo
4622018-11-08T19:15:11 <esotericnonsense> longer term if the wallet and node become more 'split out' then it seems like you're going to have a whole bunch of wallet rpc's build up over time that aren't relevant for the node, it seems unavoidable
4632018-11-08T19:15:12 <wumpus> I don't think the current ones should be removed, but i'm not sure about adding new ones
4642018-11-08T19:15:26 <MarcoFalke> We don't talk about keystore or "chainstore" rn
4652018-11-08T19:15:35 <sipa> esotericnonsense: i really think you're talking about something else
4662018-11-08T19:15:36 <achow101> I would rather that it not be separated into a separate repo. a big reason for me to have utility functions in core is that most of the framework for doing something is already there. in a separate repo, you have to reimplement stuff like serializations, etc. which is a major pain in the ass
4672018-11-08T19:15:36 <esotericnonsense> (agree that decodescript doesn't really belong in either)
4682018-11-08T19:15:58 <wumpus> achow101: if only those parts of core were available as a library heh...
4692018-11-08T19:16:17 *** retrop99 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4702018-11-08T19:16:18 <sipa> i think that bitcoin core, for better or worse, implements certain featuresets - and it makes sense to implement those features completely, even if some are stateless
4712018-11-08T19:16:33 <sipa> that doesn't mean we should add arbitrary utilities because they may be useful for something
4722018-11-08T19:16:39 <wumpus> sometimes seems we're using RPC to compensate for the fact there's no library or API separation
4732018-11-08T19:16:43 <esotericnonsense> i think provoostenator's point about RPC being non-automated is interesting
4742018-11-08T19:16:44 <esotericnonsense> yes
4752018-11-08T19:17:04 <sipa> i don't really care for decodescript being in our codebase really - it's trivial to do anywhere
4762018-11-08T19:17:06 <luke-jr> bitcoin-cli add 1 2
4772018-11-08T19:17:16 <wumpus> things that have no state don't need *remote* procedure calls
4782018-11-08T19:17:18 <esotericnonsense> like effectively a lot of RPC's are just a wrapper over a raw function call, but with the "stable ABI" pushed outwards a bit
4792018-11-08T19:17:19 <sipa> but signrawtransaction makes perfect sense, as we offer raw transaction functionality
4802018-11-08T19:17:28 <provoostenator> luke-jr yes, so we can claim that Bitcoin Core is turning complete :-P
4812018-11-08T19:17:37 <esotericnonsense> luke-jr: bitcoin-cli 1 2 add surely. RPN-RPC.
4822018-11-08T19:18:22 <instagibbs> We already kind of have frozen random util addition, I think?
4832018-11-08T19:18:46 <sipa> instagibbs: yes, there has been sort of a policy like that for a while
4842018-11-08T19:18:47 <phantomcircuit> wumpus, we definitely use the rpc stuff to compensate for there not being a good library
4852018-11-08T19:18:49 <wumpus> instagibbs: that was the idea! but recently a few new PRs have been opened in that regard which prompted this discussion
4862018-11-08T19:18:50 <luke-jr> instagibbs: I thought so, but I think I've seen more going in since then -.-
4872018-11-08T19:19:04 <wumpus> and apparently it's still controversial
4882018-11-08T19:19:10 <luke-jr> maybe just saw PRs, perhaps not going in
4892018-11-08T19:19:15 <provoostenator> Lots of folks us a microservices like architecture, wher eyou have bunch of applications on seperate servers talking to eachother. RPC is useful for that, but less so once there are enough libraries that can replace it.
4902018-11-08T19:19:16 <instagibbs> luke-jr, for example? the ones I've suggested have gone nowhere :P
4912018-11-08T19:19:19 <instagibbs> ah ok
4922018-11-08T19:19:22 <instagibbs> fair enough
4932018-11-08T19:19:29 <provoostenator> So I agree with wumpus that it's paritally a chicken egg thing
4942018-11-08T19:19:36 <wumpus> provoostenator: that RPC is useful is not the discussion, does it need to be in bitcoin core!
4952018-11-08T19:19:54 <wumpus> we can't add everything that is useful
4962018-11-08T19:20:00 <wumpus> that's infinite scope creep
4972018-11-08T19:20:03 <provoostenator> Of course
4982018-11-08T19:20:09 <sipa> absolutely
4992018-11-08T19:20:18 <gwillen> for utility stuff that doesn't go in bitcoin core, is there some way to make it available to end-users who are not developers?
5002018-11-08T19:20:23 <gwillen> e.g. a library doesn't really help them
5012018-11-08T19:20:33 <luke-jr> gwillen: can you give an example?
5022018-11-08T19:20:34 <wumpus> gwillen: you could make your own RPC server, btcutilityd, or so
5032018-11-08T19:20:35 <gwillen> unless there's a utility wrapper around it that also ships with core
5042018-11-08T19:20:37 <phantomcircuit> gwillen, see bitcoin-tx
5052018-11-08T19:20:46 <wumpus> it could be completely separate from bitcoin core
5062018-11-08T19:20:49 <wumpus> as it shares not state
5072018-11-08T19:20:50 <esotericnonsense> gwillen: it's sort of what I've been doing in my projects, but it's not public
5082018-11-08T19:20:51 <sipa> gwillen: i think wumpus' argument is not having such things in our codebase entirely
5092018-11-08T19:20:58 <luke-jr> gwillen: libraries should have wrappers for shell scripts to use them, but having trouble seeing a case where a real end user would need such things
5102018-11-08T19:20:59 <sipa> not just not exposing it over RPC
5112018-11-08T19:21:11 *** irc_viewer_test has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5122018-11-08T19:21:19 <provoostenator> Right, so a seperate utility repo could also include an RPC wrapper.
5132018-11-08T19:21:22 <esotericnonsense> or rather, it's "public" as in it's OSS/free software, but it's not marketed or known or anything (I expect there's a lot of stuff out there like this)
5142018-11-08T19:21:39 <luke-jr> if people really need RPC, let someone do a RPC-to-exec server :/
5152018-11-08T19:21:58 <wumpus> I'm just trying to prevent the codebase complicating even more, I mean, I think we should focus on consensus issues in bitcoin core, it's hard enough
5162018-11-08T19:22:04 <luke-jr> +1
5172018-11-08T19:22:08 <phantomcircuit> wumpus, agreed
5182018-11-08T19:22:15 <phantomcircuit> so anyways
5192018-11-08T19:22:15 <phantomcircuit> sipa, suggest changing the GetRandBytes functions to GetWeakRandBytes to make it more obvious, maybe
5202018-11-08T19:22:16 <gwillen> I don't think RPC is necessary for quick utilities with no state, but I do think commandline is necessary
5212018-11-08T19:22:20 <gwillen> versus just a library
5222018-11-08T19:22:21 <sipa> wumpus: so, just to gauge your opinion here, imagine we didn't have any raw transaction or PSBT functionality included, and it is being added now; would you argue for only having signrawtransactionwithwallet, but say signrawtransactionwithkey needs to be implemented elsewhere, even though it shares 95% of the code?
5232018-11-08T19:22:45 <luke-jr> gwillen: https://github.com/bitcoin/libbase58/blob/master/clitool.c
5242018-11-08T19:23:09 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
5252018-11-08T19:23:30 <provoostenator> I thikn that's reasonable actually. Especially considering that the _wallet_ could also be split out at some distant future.
5262018-11-08T19:23:34 <luke-jr> sipa: IMO, ideally we'd abstract that code into a library itself, and use it in Core
5272018-11-08T19:23:41 <wumpus> sipa: sure, it's always possible to argue some grey area where it seems harmless to add because it's only a small difference, maybe that would be ok, just not complicated things that we don't use otherwise
5282018-11-08T19:23:42 <luke-jr> or rather, use it in "wallet split out of Core"
5292018-11-08T19:23:44 <sipa> luke-jr: agree, but that's a separate discussion
5302018-11-08T19:24:14 <provoostenator> The number of RPC methods that would be left if we strip out utilities and the wallet would be nice and small.
5312018-11-08T19:24:20 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5322018-11-08T19:24:26 <sipa> wumpus: my point here is that the "feature creep" is in deciding whether to have raw transaction support or not; the fact that part of the necessary RPC calls happen to be stateless isn't
5332018-11-08T19:24:45 <wumpus> I'm not arguing to remove the current ones or so, just prevent an onslaught of new ones
5342018-11-08T19:24:58 <sipa> (this is also orthogonal to whether it should be implemented as RPC or separate utility; i'm just discussing having the functionality somewhere in our codebase)
5352018-11-08T19:25:17 <gwillen> note also, as someone doing development on the GUI right now, that the GUI might reasonably need utilities that don't touch the wallet
5362018-11-08T19:25:28 <provoostenator> (by strip out I just mean not adding more than we already have, only deprecating if they become a problem)
5372018-11-08T19:25:38 <gwillen> unless the goal for the GUI also is to be functionally minimal, which I don't think i tis
5382018-11-08T19:25:51 <wumpus> if only the GUI needs it, it could be a library at the GUI side
5392018-11-08T19:26:21 <luke-jr> gwillen: I think the goal is to split the GUI out too, but in the meantime, I see your point
5402018-11-08T19:26:52 <wumpus> so maybe it's better to discuss per PR
5412018-11-08T19:27:28 <sipa> wumpus: say for example, if somewhere were to propose a set of RPCs just to do script debugging, fully stateless, I would nack that - there is no reason for that to be in core
5422018-11-08T19:27:46 <wumpus> say, deriveaddress seems small and is only using what is already in the code base: #14667
5432018-11-08T19:27:48 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14667 | Add deriveaddress RPC util method by Sjors · Pull Request #14667 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5442018-11-08T19:28:26 <sipa> right; i think deriveaddress is a very natural part of "supporting output descriptors"
5452018-11-08T19:28:44 <luke-jr> sipa: script debugging is a libbitcoinconsensus thing
5462018-11-08T19:28:53 <sipa> luke-jr: i very strongly disagree :)
5472018-11-08T19:29:08 <luke-jr> sipa: it's inherently part of consensus code
5482018-11-08T19:29:11 <sipa> (but that's also another discussion, i think; i was just giving an example)
5492018-11-08T19:29:16 <luke-jr> true
5502018-11-08T19:29:21 <wumpus> but I guess 'encodescript' (#14476) is more controversial
5512018-11-08T19:29:24 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14476 | RPC method encodescript by mrwhythat · Pull Request #14476 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5522018-11-08T19:29:41 <wumpus> luke-jr: no, debugging does not belong in consensus
5532018-11-08T19:29:47 <sipa> yeah i don't think we should have had decodescript
5542018-11-08T19:29:53 *** irc_viewer_test has quit IRC
5552018-11-08T19:31:07 <luke-jr> wumpus: I guess I just mean the hooks, which can't really be anywhere else
5562018-11-08T19:31:07 <wumpus> it's also not difficult to implement on the application side, unlike the cryptography of deriving addresses
5572018-11-08T19:31:45 <sipa> so that was on the topic of "whether something belongs in the codebase or not"; another question is, for the things that do, separate utility/library, or RPC, or both?
5582018-11-08T19:32:27 <luke-jr> sipa: if it's being pulled in because it's tied to something that should be, then presumably that other thing is RPC already
5592018-11-08T19:32:36 <sipa> luke-jr: that's fair
5602018-11-08T19:32:57 <luke-jr> if it could be a separate utility/library, it wouldn't need to be in the codebase I guess
5612018-11-08T19:33:09 <luke-jr> (but maybe it makes sense to do all 3?)
5622018-11-08T19:33:19 <MarcoFalke> I think there is not too much cost in doing both (but currently we don't have a utility/library)
5632018-11-08T19:33:31 <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: we do have bitcoin-tx
5642018-11-08T19:33:43 <wumpus> sipa: ideally I'd prefer having a library, this more general and allows for implementing a RPC service that does the same, the other way is more limiting
5652018-11-08T19:33:48 <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: that is not useful for general utility functions
5662018-11-08T19:33:56 <luke-jr> MarcoFalke: even if we rename it?
5672018-11-08T19:34:07 <sipa> luke-jr: i think tx is too specific
5682018-11-08T19:34:17 <sipa> its arguments are all transformations on transactions
5692018-11-08T19:34:18 <MarcoFalke> good luck renaming it, heh
5702018-11-08T19:34:23 <luke-jr> I guess there's no real need to have just one tool
5712018-11-08T19:34:28 <wumpus> the advantage of an executable is that it's separate
5722018-11-08T19:34:41 <luke-jr> even for libraries, it makes sense to have different ones for substantially different tasks
5732018-11-08T19:34:50 <wumpus> it's annoying to interface with in most languages, though :)
5742018-11-08T19:34:53 <sipa> perhaps we should change topics, i need to go in 10-15 minutes
5752018-11-08T19:35:10 <wumpus> also need to spawn a new process for every call
5762018-11-08T19:35:16 <wumpus> which perf-wise is even worse than RPC
5772018-11-08T19:35:36 <wumpus> #topic [RFC] for future of RNG #14623
5782018-11-08T19:35:37 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14623 | [RFC] Built-in RNG design · Issue #14623 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5792018-11-08T19:35:50 <phantomcircuit> suggest changing the GetRandBytes functions to GetWeakRandBytes to make it more obvious, maybe
5802018-11-08T19:35:59 <sipa> phantomcircuit: good idea
5812018-11-08T19:36:18 <sipa> just a quicj topic, i'd like to ask for opinions if we want to go in that direction
5822018-11-08T19:36:19 <phantomcircuit> otherwise seems good to me
5832018-11-08T19:36:22 <sipa> if so, i'll work on it
5842018-11-08T19:36:43 <phantomcircuit> possibly want to measure how fast various sources of entropy are?
5852018-11-08T19:36:50 <luke-jr> my only concern is if RNG gets too slow for non-HD wallets to work reasonably, but I doubt that's an issue
5862018-11-08T19:36:50 <sipa> phantomcircuit: yeah
5872018-11-08T19:37:08 <wumpus> #action read issue 14623: Built-in RNG design
5882018-11-08T19:37:10 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, the openssl rng is already lol slow
5892018-11-08T19:37:11 <luke-jr> (since we don't make them, so I guess new keys are only generated one at a time)
5902018-11-08T19:37:23 <wumpus> does slowness matter for anywhere we need strong crypto?
5912018-11-08T19:37:24 <meshcollider> This isn't actually going to slow things down is it, long term might even speed it up?
5922018-11-08T19:37:29 <wumpus> I mean, now that key generation is HD
5932018-11-08T19:37:41 <luke-jr> wumpus: my point is that key generation is not necessarily HD
5942018-11-08T19:37:44 <wumpus> generating the initial seed isn't perf critical and certainly not high bandwidth
5952018-11-08T19:37:59 <wumpus> is there anything besides that?
5962018-11-08T19:38:08 <sipa> phantomcircuit: actually, GetWeakRandBytes is perhaps a bit confusing too; the data returned would be cryptographic strength, seeded by all available randomness sources - just not reseeded regularly
5972018-11-08T19:38:33 <luke-jr> GetRandomStrengthRandBytes
5982018-11-08T19:38:36 <wumpus> I guess the master key for the wallet; but that's als oa one-time thing
5992018-11-08T19:38:38 <meshcollider> GetWeaklySeededRandBytes
6002018-11-08T19:38:40 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, by far the slowest thing about keygeneration is the ridiculous number of fsync calls from bdb
6012018-11-08T19:38:51 <sipa> luke-jr: what phantomcircuit says ^
6022018-11-08T19:39:03 <sipa> generating thousands of keys per second should be trivial
6032018-11-08T19:39:19 <phantomcircuit> sipa, Strong/Mediocre/Weak
6042018-11-08T19:39:27 <phantomcircuit> heh
6052018-11-08T19:40:20 <sipa> phantomcircuit: i think two levels is sufficient :)
6062018-11-08T19:40:26 <sipa> so ok, weak and strong :)
6072018-11-08T19:40:35 <phantomcircuit> sipa, the distinction is really about things like vm state copies where we hope that /dev/random would know about that right?
6082018-11-08T19:40:39 <luke-jr> was about to ask what the use case is for the middle level :P
6092018-11-08T19:40:52 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6102018-11-08T19:40:53 <meshcollider> If you take GitHub emoji reactions as comments it looks like there's a pretty good approval consensus anyway
6112018-11-08T19:41:36 <sipa> phantomcircuit: so even weakrand in my suggestion would invoke high-accuracy timestamp (rdtsc etc), so it'd be highly unlikely that you get the same random numbers in two instances of a VM copy
6122018-11-08T19:41:36 <wumpus> what if: if you need high speed key generation, switch to HD wallet
6132018-11-08T19:41:43 <wumpus> if not, the current fallback is fine
6142018-11-08T19:41:50 <wumpus> it will be slower but work
6152018-11-08T19:41:58 <kanzure> timezones are difficult.
6162018-11-08T19:42:12 <sipa> RNG is really not the bottleneck for key generation
6172018-11-08T19:42:15 <luke-jr> wumpus: it sounds like it's a non-issue either way?
6182018-11-08T19:42:21 <wumpus> yes
6192018-11-08T19:42:22 <sipa> i think it's a non issue
6202018-11-08T19:43:12 <wumpus> #topic EOL date for 0.15 (meshcollider)
6212018-11-08T19:43:28 <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/630
6222018-11-08T19:43:33 <meshcollider> Yeah just wanted to check this date was sane to put on the website
6232018-11-08T19:43:34 <luke-jr> most nodes are still using 0.15 :x
6242018-11-08T19:43:52 <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: EOL would be august next year. Seems reasonable
6252018-11-08T19:43:57 <wumpus> what is the proposed date?
6262018-11-08T19:43:58 <luke-jr> yeah, hopefully it will change by then
6272018-11-08T19:44:01 <luke-jr> 2019-08-01
6282018-11-08T19:44:04 <phantomcircuit> sipa, indeed
6292018-11-08T19:44:06 *** dlerario has quit IRC
6302018-11-08T19:44:20 <achow101> seems reasonable
6312018-11-08T19:44:20 <wumpus> that seems.. far enough away
6322018-11-08T19:44:21 <meshcollider> luke-jr: it's maintenance end now anyway
6332018-11-08T19:45:04 <meshcollider> Ok that's all then, unless anyone disagrees :)
6342018-11-08T19:45:06 <luke-jr> (correction: 0.16 is actually now the most-used branch, barely)
6352018-11-08T19:46:33 <wumpus> yep, please do any ACKing in the PR
6362018-11-08T19:46:39 <wumpus> any other topics?
6372018-11-08T19:47:39 <kanzure> RPC is used by many companies as the only interface to bitcoin at all; not sure i understand the scope of discussion about moving RPC into another utility or project but yeah be careful i guess.
6382018-11-08T19:48:09 <meshcollider> kanzure: only a few utility RPCs, not the whole thing ;)
6392018-11-08T19:48:16 <wumpus> kanzure: the topic is not of moving any current RPCs away
6402018-11-08T19:48:24 <gwillen> one possible alternative I can think of would be to give bitcoin-cli a way to talk to multiple backends
6412018-11-08T19:48:35 <gwillen> then you can easily put utilities in a separate codebase
6422018-11-08T19:48:36 <luke-jr> gwillen: it already can?
6432018-11-08T19:48:41 <gwillen> without any user issues
6442018-11-08T19:49:14 <gwillen> luke-jr: I mean something like dispatching based on which command it's given
6452018-11-08T19:49:15 <esotericnonsense> hm. but isn't the issue the ongoing maintenance of ensuring RPC works (integrating it into the test suite etc)
6462018-11-08T19:49:19 <gwillen> for a seamless experience
6472018-11-08T19:49:21 <luke-jr> gwillen: ew :<
6482018-11-08T19:49:29 <wumpus> kanzure: as far as I'm concerned the discussion is about the addition of new pure, utility-only RPCs, what is the crit to add them, or never do it? but removing the current ones is out of the question I think
6492018-11-08T19:49:34 <esotericnonsense> i'm struggling to understand how seperating it makes it "simpler" if you keep the maintenance burden anyway
6502018-11-08T19:49:54 <kanzure> something out of scope for bitcoind but exchanges and merchants could really benefit from tracking slightly more state on bitcoind end (like "updates since last sync"- specific to an external application which otherwise has to write their own since-last-sync tracking code etc)
6512018-11-08T19:50:07 <wumpus> no way...
6522018-11-08T19:50:11 <kanzure> wumpus: got it, understood. i didn't understand context. my apologies.
6532018-11-08T19:50:19 <kanzure> wumpus: yeah i said it's out of scope :-)
6542018-11-08T19:50:31 <wumpus> really, tracking consensus is hard enough, a REALLY hard problem
6552018-11-08T19:51:18 <wumpus> I think there's too little respect for just how hard that is, even as a single concern, we can't pull in anything that is marginally useful to anyone else also
6562018-11-08T19:52:10 <jarthur> I have to say that I don't have much use for a cryptocurrency node that isn't either A) a wallet, or B) providing other services with currency network functionality. If separating the concerns out still gives me those things as I need them, no complaints.
6572018-11-08T19:52:16 <esotericnonsense> it sounds to me like provoostenator's idea of making RPC more 'automated' somehow would be useful; in the sense that you have a ton of functions that could just be exposed over rpc by like, function name or something, if they're stateless, without doing anything
6582018-11-08T19:52:33 <esotericnonsense> and then it's "someone else's job" to maintain the bitcoin library to RPC shim which ensures RPC backward compatibility
6592018-11-08T19:53:09 <wumpus> again, you're speaking of 'backward compatibility'
6602018-11-08T19:53:15 <wumpus> there's no talk of dropping anything here
6612018-11-08T19:53:34 <wumpus> the discussion was about adding...
6622018-11-08T19:53:40 <esotericnonsense> wumpus: right, what I mean is that, when you add stuff, it's not a problem a priori, it becomes a problem because over time you're maintaining it
6632018-11-08T19:53:48 <phantomcircuit> gwillen, please no
6642018-11-08T19:54:42 <esotericnonsense> there is also the overhead of dealing with a PR, merging, rebasing, basically actually doing the work
6652018-11-08T19:54:43 <wumpus> going to close the meeting we're out of topics
6662018-11-08T19:54:45 <kanzure> esotericnonsense: i would phrase that as automatically generated bindings
6672018-11-08T19:55:01 <wumpus> #endmeeting
6682018-11-08T19:55:01 <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Nov 8 19:55:01 2018 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
6692018-11-08T19:55:01 <lightningbot> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-11-08-19.00.html
6702018-11-08T19:55:01 <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-11-08-19.00.txt
6712018-11-08T19:55:01 <lightningbot> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-11-08-19.00.log.html
6722018-11-08T19:55:18 <esotericnonsense> which seems to be solved if the person in control of maintaining that 'library-RPC' interface is an external party
6732018-11-08T19:55:27 <esotericnonsense> anyway, yeah, i'm kind of external in this, just musing... sorry
6742018-11-08T19:55:28 <wumpus> yes, don't put it on my plate and I'm happy
6752018-11-08T19:55:57 <meshcollider> Time to add an RPC maintainer too ;)
6762018-11-08T19:56:16 <wumpus> meshcollider: are you interested?
6772018-11-08T19:57:43 <luke-jr> lol
6782018-11-08T19:57:55 <instagibbs> RPC Tsar
6792018-11-08T19:58:24 <meshcollider> That was partly a joke but does the RPC really need its own maintainer?
6802018-11-08T19:58:53 <wumpus> nothing 'needs', but could if someone was interested in taking that up
6812018-11-08T19:59:13 <wumpus> we can really use any help at this point
6822018-11-08T20:02:15 <meshcollider> Well I'm always happy to help, I thought the wallet maintainer was more needed than other random parts of the code though
6832018-11-08T20:04:18 <wumpus> well if you want to be wallet maintainer that's great too ;)
6842018-11-08T20:04:41 <meshcollider> Haha oh no ;)
6852018-11-08T20:05:13 <wumpus> nah seriously just pick what part you're interested in
6862018-11-08T20:05:17 <meshcollider> Speaking of which though, in seriousness, that discussion has been going on for months now with no result. What would it take to actually learn to fill that role?
6872018-11-08T20:06:55 *** ken2812221_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6882018-11-08T20:07:48 <luke-jr> meshcollider: I would guess making an explicit effort to review <topic> PRs and move them forward
6892018-11-08T20:08:20 <wumpus> you can be maintainer of any part you're interested in by actively reviewing PRs in that area and getting involved there
6902018-11-08T20:08:34 *** ken2812221 has quit IRC
6912018-11-08T20:08:44 <wumpus> it doesn't have to be the wallet, that's just the running joke because it turns out to be really hard to find a maintainer for that :)
6922018-11-08T20:09:05 <meshcollider> Because the wallet is still quite a mixture of things, e.g. coin selection is quite different to the key stuff
6932018-11-08T20:09:42 <meshcollider> To be comfortable with it all at a deep enough level seems hard lol
6942018-11-08T20:09:44 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
6952018-11-08T20:09:59 <sipa> sorry, had to run
6962018-11-08T20:14:54 <wumpus> I'm not sure what a 'deep enough level' is here though
6972018-11-08T20:15:37 <meshcollider> Neither am I ;)
6982018-11-08T20:16:03 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6992018-11-08T20:18:07 <meshcollider> I guess it feels like to be a good maintainer of an aspect, you should be an expert in that aspect's code
7002018-11-08T20:18:27 <luke-jr> probably comes naturally with time reviewing everything going into it
7012018-11-08T20:19:20 <wumpus> well you need to be an expert compared to new people contributing to it at least, you don't need to know everything, you don't have to take decisions without other people's input
7022018-11-08T20:19:57 <instagibbs> wumpus doesn't have to know literally everything to be overall maintainer; you need to digest discussions, prod, etc
7032018-11-08T20:20:07 <wumpus> exactly.
7042018-11-08T20:20:20 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7052018-11-08T20:21:46 <meshcollider> Both very good points lol
7062018-11-08T20:25:09 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
7072018-11-08T20:26:50 <meshcollider> Hmm well I guess it is something I can work towards in the meantime :)
7082018-11-08T20:33:58 *** ExtraCrispy has quit IRC
7092018-11-08T20:38:43 <instagibbs> I bet if you just fake it you'll make it eventually
7102018-11-08T20:39:49 <meshcollider> Hahaha your support is much appreciated greg
7112018-11-08T20:45:57 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7122018-11-08T20:51:34 *** shesek has quit IRC
7132018-11-08T20:53:56 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
7142018-11-08T20:55:06 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7152018-11-08T20:55:06 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7162018-11-08T20:56:27 *** phwalkr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7172018-11-08T20:58:29 *** face has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7182018-11-08T21:01:09 *** phwalkr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7192018-11-08T21:14:19 *** gabridome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7202018-11-08T21:21:10 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7212018-11-08T21:25:51 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
7222018-11-08T21:30:24 *** mistergold has quit IRC
7232018-11-08T21:41:02 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
7242018-11-08T21:41:13 *** gabridome has quit IRC
7252018-11-08T21:42:07 *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7262018-11-08T21:42:33 *** instagibbs has quit IRC
7272018-11-08T21:42:34 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7282018-11-08T21:43:38 *** retrop99 has quit IRC
7292018-11-08T21:48:42 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
7302018-11-08T21:49:18 *** ezzzy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7312018-11-08T21:49:21 *** esotericnonsense has quit IRC
7322018-11-08T21:51:12 *** esotericnonsense has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7332018-11-08T21:54:00 *** ezzzy has quit IRC
7342018-11-08T21:55:23 *** esotericnonsense has quit IRC
7352018-11-08T21:56:58 *** arubi has quit IRC
7362018-11-08T21:57:21 *** esotericnonsense has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7372018-11-08T21:57:23 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7382018-11-08T22:00:26 *** JackH has quit IRC
7392018-11-08T22:01:48 *** esotericnonsense has quit IRC
7402018-11-08T22:03:35 *** esotericnonsense has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7412018-11-08T22:21:08 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7422018-11-08T22:21:08 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #14693: test_node: get_mem_rss fixups (master...Mf1811-qaTestNodeFixups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14693
7432018-11-08T22:21:08 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
7442018-11-08T22:30:22 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7452018-11-08T22:35:43 *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7462018-11-08T22:35:54 *** bitconner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7472018-11-08T22:36:43 *** phwalkr has quit IRC
7482018-11-08T22:37:17 *** phwalkr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7492018-11-08T22:43:33 *** phwalkr has quit IRC
7502018-11-08T22:55:52 *** spinza has quit IRC
7512018-11-08T22:59:25 *** roasbeef_ is now known as roasbeef
7522018-11-08T23:07:16 *** shesek has quit IRC
7532018-11-08T23:10:13 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7542018-11-08T23:10:13 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7552018-11-08T23:20:58 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7562018-11-08T23:20:58 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #10896: Optimize compact reconstruction somewhat (master...2017-07-faster-compact-reconstruction) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10896
7572018-11-08T23:20:58 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
7582018-11-08T23:21:06 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7592018-11-08T23:21:06 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #9298: [Wallet] use CHDPubKey, don't store child priv keys in db, derive on the fly (master...2016/12/hd_no_priv) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9298
7602018-11-08T23:21:06 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
7612018-11-08T23:25:51 <meshcollider> Is this a new drahtbot feature ^
7622018-11-08T23:28:23 <MarcoFalke> Old feature, but I only run it manually every couple of weeks
7632018-11-08T23:29:06 *** arubi has quit IRC
7642018-11-08T23:29:07 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7652018-11-08T23:29:29 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7662018-11-08T23:31:44 *** leishman_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7672018-11-08T23:34:34 *** booyah has quit IRC
7682018-11-08T23:34:36 *** booyah_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7692018-11-08T23:40:17 *** hebasto has quit IRC
7702018-11-08T23:41:34 *** shesek has quit IRC
7712018-11-08T23:42:05 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7722018-11-08T23:46:19 *** Murch has quit IRC
7732018-11-08T23:49:18 *** JackH has quit IRC
7742018-11-08T23:49:38 *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
7752018-11-08T23:58:23 *** jarthur has quit IRC
7762018-11-08T23:59:57 <esotericnonsense> hm. sorry if this isn't really a 'core-dev' question but i'm having shower thoughts of a kind...