00:27
<
laanwj >
no, please don't introduce any new scripting languages for testing, python should be enough to do everything and is readily available for all platforms we care about
00:30
<
laanwj >
can't just require every reviewer/maintainer has to learn a new programming language so you don't have to learn python
03:53
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/0.21 c5357fa Andrew Poelstra: fuzz: add missing ECCVerifyHandle to base_encode_decode
03:53
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/0.21 70eac6f MarcoFalke: Fix crash when parsing command line with -noincludeconf=0
03:53
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/0.21 513613d MarcoFalke: Cleanup -includeconf error message
15:21
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/master a164cd3 Vasil Dimov: net: simplify CNetAddr::IsRoutable()
15:21
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/master bdb6209 Vasil Dimov: fuzz: reduce possible networks check
15:21
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/master 00b875b Vasil Dimov: addrman: remove invalid addresses when unserializing
15:45
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/master aa0a5bb Sebastian Falbesoner: test: add `bad-txns-prevout-null` test case to invalid_txs.py
15:45
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/master 1f44958 Sebastian Falbesoner: test: add `bad-txns-prevout-null` test to mempool_accept.py
15:45
<
bitcoin-git >
bitcoin/master df2b5da MarcoFalke: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22408: test: add tests for `bad-txns-prevout-null` r...
19:00
<
laanwj >
#startmeeting
19:00
<
core-meetingbot >
Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
19:00
<
laanwj >
#bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: achow101
_aj_ amiti ariard BlueMatt cfields Chris_Stewart_5 darosior digi_james dongcarl elichai2 emilengler fanquake fjahr gleb glozow gmaxwell gwillen hebasto instagibbs jamesob jarolrod jb55 jeremyrubin jl2012 jnewbery jonasschnelli jonatack jtimon kallewoof kanzure kvaciral laanwj lightlike luke-jr maaku marcofalke meshcollider michagogo moneyball morcos
19:00
<
laanwj >
nehan NicolasDorier paveljanik petertodd phantomcircuit promag provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar sipa vasild
19:01
<
laanwj >
one pre-proposed topic: should we keep both guix and gitian for 22.0 release (hebasto)
19:01
<
laanwj >
any last minute topics?
19:02
<
laanwj >
#topic 22.0 release
19:02
<
core-meetingbot >
topic: 22.0 release
19:02
<
laanwj >
I think we're getting pretty close to the point where we can branch off 22.0
19:02
<
michaelfolkson >
hi
19:02
<
hebasto >
#20234 seems rtm
19:02
<
laanwj >
most of the remaining tagged PRs are almost ready for merge
19:03
<
laanwj >
some can use a little more review
19:03
<
luke-jr >
#22412 should be added to 22.0 blockers
19:03
<
laanwj >
that one's too controversial to add last minute to a release
19:04
<
luke-jr >
laanwj: so what? 22.0 will just be broken?
19:04
<
laanwj >
opinions differ on that
19:04
<
jonatack >
i plan to test #22112 a bit further, and maybe update the hardcoded i2p seeds
19:04
<
luke-jr >
laanwj: fixing it has zero downside
19:05
<
laanwj >
jonatack: good point on the hardcoded seeds,they should use port 0 too?
19:05
<
jonatack >
that's done in the PR. but some seem less active and new ones have arrived since
19:05
<
sipa >
luke-jr: in what way is current master broken?
19:05
<
laanwj >
oh, right
19:05
<
sipa >
it's not clear to me if this is a code smell issue, or incorrect RPC output
19:06
<
jonatack >
(will re-verify, i know of 16 I2P ones now)
19:06
<
luke-jr >
sipa: incorrect RPC output, and test failure
19:06
<
luke-jr >
(incorrect output is only supposed to be used by tests)
19:06
<
laanwj >
I think dropping support for system unicode would make sense, the upstream is hardly updated and/or diverged too much to kep supporting it
19:07
<
jamesob >
*univalue :)
19:07
<
sipa >
oh this is only if you're using system univalue?
19:07
<
laanwj >
we subtree it anyway so I don't really see the point of the current construction
19:07
<
laanwj >
univalue yes
19:07
<
luke-jr >
laanwj: it makes no sense. we should not diverge at all
19:07
<
luke-jr >
the subtree should be dropped, ideally, but supporting using the system install is a bare minimum comptence
19:07
<
laanwj >
luke-jr: there is not much choice given how intermittently upstream is maintained
19:07
<
luke-jr >
laanwj: it's maintained when there's things to maintain
19:08
<
sipa >
14 open pull requests, and no commits since 2019?
19:09
<
laanwj >
sipa: right
19:09
<
luke-jr >
sipa: it works. the only reason there's a problem is that Marco is intentionally diverging the subtree
19:09
<
laanwj >
#topic should we keep both guix and gitian for 22.0 release (hebasto)
19:09
<
core-meetingbot >
topic: should we keep both guix and gitian for 22.0 release (hebasto)
19:09
<
hebasto >
it is expected that 22.0 release binaries will be built with guix
19:09
<
hebasto >
otoh, currently, gitian builds for linux do not pass glibc symbol check
19:10
<
laanwj >
I think we should delete the gitian stuff after doing a succesful gitian release
19:10
<
laanwj >
a succesful guix release
19:10
<
laanwj >
not before that
19:10
<
hebasto >
that means after rc1 or rc2?
19:10
<
laanwj >
it doesn't work 100% at the moment but it's easier to fix up in case there are unforseen problems with guix than bringing everything back
19:10
<
laanwj >
no, after final
19:11
<
hebasto >
in that case 22.0 release source code will contain broken gitian stuff
19:12
<
hebasto >
if that is ok, let it be
19:12
<
laanwj >
I don't see a big problem with that
19:12
<
hebasto >
should we mention it in release notes?
19:12
<
sipa >
it doesn't affect the release
19:12
<
laanwj >
no, it's of no interest to end users
19:13
<
luke-jr >
it changes how end users verify binaries
19:13
<
sipa >
yes, that should be mentioned
19:13
<
laanwj >
that would make sense to mention then
19:15
<
laanwj >
any other topics?
19:15
<
laanwj >
#endmeeting
19:15
<
core-meetingbot >
Meeting ended Thu Jul 8 19:15:55 2021 UTC.
19:17
<
ariard >
could we add #21859 as high-prio, i think it builds now and should be ready for review :) ?
19:19
<
_aj_ >
achow101: btw, thanks for the pointer to 21500, solved my problem fine!
19:30
<
jnewbery >
laanwj: can we add #21800 to high priority? It's the next blocker in the package acceptance work
20:01
<
mtest >
test (please disregard)