< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] murrayn opened pull request #12809: Formatting changes to --help code for increased readability. (master...help_formatting) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12809
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] romanz opened pull request #12810: [Tests] Fix a typo at assert_start_raises_init_error() and update its invocation (master...fix-blocksdir-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12810
< wumpus> I've added jnewbery to the issue management team: there's now fanquake, meshcollider, cfields and jnewbery that can help with issues and PRs on github, and open/close them
< aj> wumpus: if you haven't noticed already, #12806 is needed to fix travis failure on master
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12806 | qa: Fix function names in feature_blocksdir by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #12806 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< wumpus> aj: thanks
< wumpus> aj: it's strange, I don't have errors while running the test suite locally
< aj> wumpus: really? feature_blocksdir should be failing pretty trivially
< wumpus> let me check again
< wumpus> first want to be sure because I might have a stale file around or such
< provoostenator> I'll run it on macOS. Though in my experience the functional test suite rarely passes in a single attempt on my machine.
< wumpus> ok yes it's failing
< wumpus> let's make the FAILED on the last line red when things fail
< aj> wumpus: there's #12810 as well, but i hadn't noticed it causing a bug
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12810 | [Tests] Fix a typo at assert_start_raises_init_error() by romanz · Pull Request #12810 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< wumpus> it must have just scrolled by yesterday as feature_blocksdir.py is one of the first in the long list, apparently didn't notice
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ac898b689c66...18606eb475fb
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d71bedb MarcoFalke: qa: Fix function names in feature_blocksdir
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 18606eb Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12806: qa: Fix function names in feature_blocksdir...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12806: qa: Fix function names in feature_blocksdir (master...Mf1803-qaBlocksdirFixup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12806
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #12811: test: Make summary row bold-red if any test failed (master...2018_03_tests_summaryrow) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12811
< aj> wumpus: if you're making test_runner nicer, might work to just report all the failed tests at the end so they're easy to find. https://github.com/laanwj/bitcoin/pull/6 has sample code
< wumpus> yes, there's probably a ton of different things that could be done
< wumpus> I like making the row red though
< wumpus> though could do what you propose in addition to that, as it saves scrolling to find what failed
< aj> wumpus: i meant as well, not instead :)
< wumpus> right :)
< wumpus> I'll pull in your commit
< aj> wumpus: feel free to squash it, i didn't write a good commit message :)
< wumpus> instead of adding a sort_key we change the natural sorting order of the object
< wumpus> probably want to sort by 1) status, then within that 2) name
< wumpus> oh it does
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Empact opened pull request #12812: Test ReadConfigFile (master...test-read-config-file) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12812
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] murrayn opened pull request #12813: Update man pages (master...man_pages) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12813
< aj> wumpus: right, could define __lt__(self, other) by the looks; but i think dealing with status would be more painful that way
< wumpus> yes, I looked at it and decided not to bother, it works fine like this, no use in overthinking it
< wumpus> in a way having the sort key explicit is kind of nice instead of wondering what kind of magic makes it work
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] murrayn closed pull request #12813: Update man pages (master...man_pages) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12813
< jnewbery> Is there a way to block user https://github.com/btcerichcom from opening issues/PRs?
< wumpus> yes, I'll do it
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery closed pull request #11614: ZMQ: Add decodedtx topic for JSON tx publishing (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11614
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/18606eb475fb...174d0160cb6b
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master adc2586 MarcoFalke: doc: Refer to witness reserved value as spec. in the BIP
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 174d016 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12798: doc: Refer to witness reserved value as spec. in the BIP...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12798: doc: Refer to witness reserved value as spec. in the BIP (master...Mf1803-docWitnessReservedValue) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12798
< provoostenator> What is bitdb in #11625 ryanofsky?
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11625 | WIP: Add BitcoinApplication & RPCConsole tests by ryanofsky · Pull Request #11625 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/174d0160cb6b...0d8fc8de076d
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f92541f Wladimir J. van der Laan: test: Make summary row bold-red if any test failed...
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ffb033a Anthony Towns: test: List any failed tests at the end of test_runner output...
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0d8fc8d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12811: test: Make summary row bold-red if any test failed and show failed tests at end of table...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12811: test: Make summary row bold-red if any test failed and show failed tests at end of table (master...2018_03_tests_summaryrow) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12811
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0d8fc8de076d...624bee96597c
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master bc6fdf2 John Newbery: Change all python files to use Python3
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1874058 Evan Klitzke: Make base58 python contrib code work with python3
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 624bee9 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11881: Remove Python2 support...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11881: Remove Python2 support (master...remove_python2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11881
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #12818: [qt] TransactionView: highlight replacement tx after fee bump (master...2018/03/bump-fee-focus) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12818
< BlueMatt> #10762 looks very merge-able
< BlueMatt> wumpus: ^
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10762 | [wallet] Remove Wallet dependencies from init.cpp by jnewbery · Pull Request #10762 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< jnewbery> release-notes.md conflicts are really irritating. Any thoughts on how to make them stop? Perhaps have a separate release-notes file for each PR that requires them, eg release-notes-pr1234.md, and then concatenate/edit them before the release? Release notes need a lot of editing anyway, so might not add too much overhead
< sipa> jnewbery: that doesn't seem like more overhead than the to-wiki-and-back dance we do already at the end
< BlueMatt> jimpo: I'd really rather the paralell-txindex stuff not have its own thread
< BlueMatt> we have too much thread proliferation already, can it not fit cleanly into just running in the scheduler/validationinterface thread(s) (and we can add another thread there when things get too full)
< jimpo> BlueMatt the thread is just for when the index needs to catch up to the blockchain state from way behind (like behind BlockConnected callbacks).
< jimpo> Once it gets in sync once, the thread exits and the index is kept in sync by the validation interface.
< BlueMatt> ah, ok, right, will finish reviewing before I comment more :p
< jimpo> \o/ Code review is happening!
< MarcoFalke_trave> wumpus, Are you around for merges? I might send you a list of pulls
< paulg222> with bitcoin 0.16 in regtest mode I'm seeing that coinbase transactions are not going to a segwit p2sh wrapped address, but to a regular p2pkh address. Is that expected?
< arubi> paulg222, it's going to a p2pk, not p2pkh. use generatetoaddress
< arubi> (if you want a different address that is)
< instagibbs> jnewbery, ive had to rebase a couple PRs a couple times each due to that :/
< sipa> instagibbs: easy rebases, thankfully :)
< instagibbs> muh acks!
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #12820: contrib: Fix check-doc script regexes (master...Mf1803-qaCheckDocRegex) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12820
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #12821: contrib: Remove unused import string (master...Mf1803-contribUnusedImportClangFormatDiff) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12821
< BlueMatt> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/7deba93bdc76616011a9f493cbc203d60084416f <-- wtf? we dont bump trusted-git-root when a pgp key expires...this is what allow-revsit-commits is for. let alone doing so without removing the key from trusted-keys :(
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt opened pull request #12822: Revert 7deba93bdc76616011a9f493cbc203d60084416f and fix expired-key-sigs properly (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12822
< MarcoFalke_trave> BlueMatt, they keys in trusted-keys are the root keys
< MarcoFalke_trave> Can't remove them
< MarcoFalke_trave> Imo we should change them to the specific subkeys instead
< BlueMatt> the key in question expired
< MarcoFalke_trave> sipa, around? Mind to merge #12821
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12821 | contrib: Remove unused import string by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #12821 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< BlueMatt> we tried that, it didnt work very well
< BlueMatt> we started with the subkeys listed
< BlueMatt> and things blew up regularly
< BlueMatt> oh, you're saying your root isnt expired, yea, ok
< BlueMatt> either way, shouldnt have updated trusted-git-root
< BlueMatt> let alone doing so without a fucking PR
< MarcoFalke_trave> Having the root key in there means I can't ever put a subkey on a different machine
< MarcoFalke_trave> :s/different/slightly compromised/
< BlueMatt> if thats your concern you should have a git-signing separate primary key
< BlueMatt> fully-separate them instead of partially combining them
< eklitzke> maco when you're traveling your nick should be MarcoPolo
< instagibbs> sdaftuar the `IsDust` use in both relay and wallet policy seems like it makes reasoning about p2sh outputs weird to me. I guess you just pretend the output is p2sh-p2wpkh, and use that for relay dust calculation?
< instagibbs> (I'm leaving it for now, just thinking aloud)
< sdaftuar> instagibbs: yeah i was wondering what effect this has on relay policy too -- but figure we might as well just make it right for our wallet at least
< instagibbs> the functional test already is pretty coarse-grained
< sdaftuar> so we could just add a way to indicate we want the p2sh-p2wpkh assumption and use that only for our wallet, if we don't want to change relay policy
< instagibbs> checks that you dump 100 satoshis
< instagibbs> right
< instagibbs> or just split the concerns to allow us to move faster with wallet stuff
< sdaftuar> oh hmm. i guess the reason we have a discard rate in the first place is to be sure that we have a buffer above the prevailing network dust-fee
< sdaftuar> so splitting might be counter to that a little
< sdaftuar> in that we might decouple our calculation from the network-wide policy
< sdaftuar> oh.. so this is unfortunate i guess, in that current network nodes are applying a dust threshold that is "too high" for our p2sh-segwit wallet. good thing we have a discard rate in the first place i guess! but given that it gets capped at the long term fee estimate, i'm not sure what value we're actually using now
< instagibbs> ill update the test at least to be a bit tighter
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #12823: doc: Add .gitattributes file for release-notes.md (master...Mf1803-docGitattributes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12823
< BlueMatt> #12754 does not look like an "upstream" issue - the reporter indicating some things we should probably do that make upstream behave the proper way
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12754 | [zmq] pub/sub is not reliable at all · Issue #12754 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< BlueMatt> should lose the upstream tag
< MarcoFalke_trave> Removed
< hkjn0> hey, maybe I'm just missing something basic here, but I had a tx which sendrawtransaction accepted and returned txid, but getrawtransaction (with txindex=1) still can't find.. how can this happen?
< hkjn0> I'm assuming that if the fee was lower than minrelaytxfee we'd return an error instead of a txid..
< jnewbery> hkjn0: #bitcoin please. This channel is for bitcoin core development
< hkjn0> yup, sorry, realized after writing it was off-topic