< jnewbery>
stevenroose: are you able to spin up multiple bitcoinds, and then mine blocks on both?
< jnewbery>
wumpus: ah, makes sense re feature freeze. Thanks
< wumpus>
is it still responsible to continue with the 0.20 release schedule as-is? or should we postpone things for a month or so? I'm able to continue on schedule but I don't know, I understand if you have other things occupying you right now
< fanquake>
wumpus: I'd be happy to continue as is. Could extend the RC stage for longer than usual, if the concern is that it will be under-tested.
< fanquake>
Feature wise I don't think there's much that has "just missed out" that would make it in if we kept the feature window open much longer.
< wumpus>
that's my main concern, yes, less people involved so less testing; but you have a good point too, it would probably make very little difference for the feature freeze and the people that need to support their family aren't going to work on features this month anyway :)
< fanquake>
I'm half wondering if we're going to get a spike in activity while people are being quarantined/and might be doing less job-wise.
< wumpus>
it could go that way too!
< fanquake>
Regardless. I'm happy to keep the schedule as is with some more time for testing. Up to you!
< sipa>
wumpus: things may change rapidly for people the next few weeks
< sipa>
i'm happy either way
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #18358: util: fix compilation with mingw-w64 7.0.0 (master...mingw_w64_gmtime_s) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18358
< wumpus>
jnewbery: you're right that it would make sense to write down these details such as 'what is the feature freeze' of the release process somewhere
< fanquake>
I think it'd also be good to have a doc that outlines what changes are suitable for backport.
< fanquake>
I've seem some PRs suggested for backport recently that are neither security fixes, bug fixes, regressions or really that important at all.
< fanquake>
The bar for backporting (at least I think) is a bit higher than fixing something in the GUI that might be a bit inconvenient.
< fanquake>
Backports also get even less review than regular PRs.
< wumpus>
I agree that the bar for backports should be pretty high, it either needs to be a serious issue or big inconvenience, or maybe a smaller one *if the change itself is trivial*
< yevaud>
backports probably also have the lowest usage out of any version of bitcoin core. the use-case for operating them is fairly slim.
< yevaud>
services that are indentured to a specific version for reasons of interface, modification, etc.
< yevaud>
for the latter, the intersection of people who have made non-portable changes to their client and are unwilling to maintain them has got to be fairly small.
< wumpus>
yes, from my experience .1 versions are most popular, as some people wait out .0
< wumpus>
after that it's likely downhill with adaptation
< wumpus>
unless there's some serious known issue, of course
< hebasto_>
promag: is there an easy way to downgrade apple clang from 10.0 to 9.0?
< jonatack>
wumpus: on schedule or perhaps slightly modified for a wee bit more time for testing sgtm. (the feature freeze heuristic of risk and user-facing items makes sense to me.)
< promag>
hebasto_: hi, dunno
< promag>
I'm lazy at updating the system
< promag>
anyway, <string> is missing there because is's used in that header
< hebasto_>
I understand this, but couldn't to reproduce and test
< promag>
yeah, not sure what commit changed this
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #18360: Bump transifex slug and update English translations for 0.20 (master...2020_03_translations_020x) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18360
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 82dd886 Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Periodical translations update
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 2a1b85f Wladimir J. van der Laan: tx: Bump transifex slug to 020x
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master d31f925 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #18360: Bump transifex slug and update English translations for 0.20...
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #18360: Bump transifex slug and update English translations for 0.20 (master...2020_03_translations_020x) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18360
< wumpus>
jonatack: thanks for weighing in; so seems for now, the consensus is that we should continue on-schedule with the feature freeze and rc1, but leave some more time for testing
< yevaud>
pinheadmz: not only its own, but transactions it is party to.
< wumpus>
yep if you want to have complete control over (re)broadcasting there's -walletbroadcast=0
< sipa>
wumpus: thinking more about things, i think that the length of the RC period is mostly determined by how many RCs we need; if no new-RC-worthy issues pop up in a few weeks, i doubt adding another month is going to help
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master fac5225 MarcoFalke: rpc: Document an RPCResult for all calls; Enforce at compile time
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 25424cf Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #18346: rpc: Document an RPCResult for all calls; Enforce at compile...
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #18346: rpc: Document an RPCResult for all calls; Enforce at compile time (master...2003-docAllRpcRes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18346
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 7a6627a Samer Afach: Fix mining to an invalid target + ensure that a new block has the
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 7060d2d MarcoFalke: Merge #18350: test: Fix mining to an invalid target + ensure that a new bl...
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #18350: test: Fix mining to an invalid target + ensure that a new block has the correct hash internally (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18350
< sipa>
achow101: why does ScriptPubKeyMan have methods SignTransaction/SignMessage/FillPSBT? I would expect that those can be implemented generically for all SPKMs