< Madscotslad>
and i thought IRC was dead years ago :P
< Madscotslad>
bored waiting on my node syncing lol
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] 251Labs opened pull request #12430: [rpc] Fix issue: "Negative version of transaction using json-rpc" (master...patch/11561/fix-negative-json-rpc-version) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12430
< gmaxwell>
:(
< gmaxwell>
but the transaction version number there really is negative.
< gmaxwell>
the distinction isn't irrelevant too, because there are <= rules on transaction versions.
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] 251Labs closed pull request #12430: [rpc] Fix issue: "Negative version of transaction using json-rpc" (master...patch/11561/fix-negative-json-rpc-version) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12430
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #12432: [qt] send: Clear All also resets coin control options (master...2018/02/qt-send-clear-all-coin-control) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12432
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 6ef86c9 Matt Corallo: Do not un-mark fInMempool on wallet txn if ATMP fails....
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 6bb9c13 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11866: Do not un-mark fInMempool on wallet txn if ATMP fails....
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11866: Do not un-mark fInMempool on wallet txn if ATMP fails. (master...2017-12-11839-fixup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11866
< instagibbs>
can't tell from issues directly, will there be an rc4?
< BlueMatt>
yes
< wumpus>
yes, there are a few things that have been backported to the 0.16 branch since rc3
< wumpus>
there are also still two PRs open with 0.16.0 tag and "needs backport"
< wumpus>
so we can't roll rc4 yet
< instagibbs>
ok, some marked 0.16.1, which confused me. makes sense
< wumpus>
ones marked 0.16.1 don't hold up the 0.16.0 release
< instagibbs>
I saw one marked with both*, but yes
< luke-jr>
wumpus: did someone get the string fix in yet?
< luke-jr>
#12208
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12208 | GUI: Rephrase Bech32 checkbox texts, and enable it with legacy address default by luke-jr · Pull Request #12208 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #12433: [qt] move SendCoinsRecipient to its own file (master...2018/02/qt-send-coins-recipient) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12433
< jamesob>
if missing, should AssertLockHeld(cs_main) statements be added (if we're already in the neighborhood anyway)?
< sipa>
jamesob: yes, if it doesn't break things
< sipa>
it may lead you on a wild goose chase :)
< sipa>
oh, wait, this is the dynamic version
< sipa>
i was thinking about the stativ annotations, ignore me
< sipa>
yes, i'd say always add AssertLockHeld if it applies
< jamesob>
sipa: cool, thanks
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #12434: [doc] dev-notes: Members should be initialized (master...Mf1802-docDevMemberInit) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12434