17:43 < contrapumpkin> what were the origins of the OP_CHECKMULTISIG bug? was it a misunderstanding or a typo or what?

17:44 < sipa> you'll have to ask satoshi

17:44 < * contrapumpkin> calls him up

17:50 < arubi> that's nothing compared to the sighash single bug, where you sign a value called "one", it looks like "one", and it ends up being 2^248 :P

17:53 < sipa> or the "concatenate scriptPubKey and scriptSig before execution" joke :)

20:32 < gmaxwell> As if we didn't have other reasons to want to move off of github, geesh:

20:32 < gmaxwell> 12:30:03 < spudowiar> I did some GitHub trolling (because he was saying that Jimmy Song contributed to BCH because they cherry-picked his commit) :P https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/07815c08af49320454701dbe2e088540956bd049

20:33 < gmaxwell> apparently those URLs will show commits from any forks.

20:33 < gmaxwell> so anyone who wants to could form a commit that looked like it was from any of us, and link to it in our repository.

20:44 < contrapumpkin> yeah, that's confused several people in different communities I've seen

20:44 < contrapumpkin> I suppose the github claim is that if you care, you should look for the branch/tag marker under the commit message, but who's going to notice that

20:50 < sipa> it would be nice to have a setting on github that it won't show your name (or at least not link to your profile) on any commits that you haven't GPG signed

20:50 < TD-Linux> yeah. in fact it'd be nice if you could totally bypass its normal email verification method, or not use emails in git commits at all when doing so.

20:51 < sipa> right

21:56 < pincode_> yep

22:34 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] cryptonexii opened pull request #12236: Latest windows build instructions (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12236

22:35 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] cryptonexii closed pull request #12236: Latest windows build instructions (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12236