< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] TheBlueMatt closed pull request #16279: Return the AcceptBlock CValidationState directly in ProcessNewBlock (master...2019-06-pnb-dos-state) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16279
< fanquake>
sipa can you block olivia8090 from the repo. Spamming.
< sipa>
fanquake: done
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] TheBlueMatt closed pull request #15482: Implement BIPXXX's new softfork rules (The Great Consensus Cleanup) (master...2019-02-great-consensus-cleanup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15482
< BlueMatt>
#16323 and #16324 are up for grabs if anyone wants to work on them, but there seems to be ~zero interest in reviewing them, cause they have wonderfully scary titles (despite the code actually being pretty simple) :)
< jamesob>
BlueMatt: I'm very interested in that project, just having a hard time getting a sense of the end goal (though haven't looked at them recently). I'll give them a look in the next few weeks and maybe write up some kind of explanation.
< BlueMatt>
oh it got cleaned up a lot, those two prs, by themselves, where essentially an end-goal
< BlueMatt>
some of te earlier work was a mess
< jamesob>
okay cool, will definitely take a look
< jeremyrubin>
BlueMatt: I kinda disagree with changes like "changing the scriptsig to be pushonly"
< BlueMatt>
jeremyrubin: context? that pr is like way out of date compared to current thinking on the bip, which also needs rewritten
< jeremyrubin>
I think if you (or whoever picks it up) actually wanted to see some of the more reasonable changes go through, it would be good to unbundle the changes
< jeremyrubin>
so that they can be independently assessed
< BlueMatt>
that...really defeats the purpose, and also needlessly slows it down
< BlueMatt>
also, there is no use for non-pushonly-scriptsigs, so at least that really should happen.
< jeremyrubin>
Oh I missed that you weren't saying great consensus was up for grabs, misread
< BlueMatt>
oh, no, the other two there
< jeremyrubin>
Yes there is! I use it for OP_SECURETHEBAG's design as bare script makes it much more efficient.
< jeremyrubin>
I 'spose I could just introduce a new witness version instead, but that seems lame.
< BlueMatt>
right, do that, cause that also means lower fees and more blockchain space :p
< jeremyrubin>
if you carve out that OP_NOPs are not removed... I guess I could approve of it
< BlueMatt>
in any case, I'm not really actively working on that stuff atm...
< jeremyrubin>
IDGI -- why is that lower fees and more blockchain space?
< jeremyrubin>
OP_SECURETHEBAG has, by default, no scriptsig so segwit doesn't save anything
< BlueMatt>
cause segwit vs scriptSig is cheaper
< BlueMatt>
then why do you care if scriptSig must be pushonly?
< jeremyrubin>
oh
< jeremyrubin>
I always mix up scriptSig and scriptPubKey
< jeremyrubin>
carry on :p
< BlueMatt>
heh, alright
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] promag opened pull request #17457: gui: Fix manual coin control with multiple wallets loaded (master...2019-11-fix-15725) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17457
< jnewbery>
#16279 seems to have already had a lot of review. I liked everything except the last commit in that one, so I might grab those
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16279 | Return the AcceptBlock CValidationState directly in ProcessNewBlock by TheBlueMatt . Pull Request #16279 . bitcoin/bitcoin . GitHub
< jnewbery>
I also liked _Add new peer state tracking class to reduce cs_main contention_ from #16323, so might try to grab that one too