<_aj_>
hmm, the pyzmq 25.0 release from 40 minutes ago seems to be breaking CI for bitcoin-inquisition; maybe breaking master/24.0 too? https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6396380575432704
Guyver2__ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Guyver2__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<MacroFake>
I wondered yesterday if we should pin the zmq dependency, but then figured that it is used so widely that it would be unlikely they introduced a bug
Norrin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #26882: test: skip sqlite3 tests if it isn't available (master...func_tests_check_import_sqlite) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26882
<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 672f7ad fanquake: doc: remove usages of C++11
<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master fcd1a57 MarcoFalke: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#26827: doc: use "std lib clock" over "C++11 clock"
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #26827: doc: use "std lib clock" over "C++11 clock" (master...doc_std_lib_clocks) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26827
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
kexkey has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
MrFrancis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guyver2__ has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<michaelfolkson>
fanquake glozow: If you're around can you attend today's IRC meeting. I'd like to discuss the vasild maintainer situation, seems like a farce at this point
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
salvatoshi has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
as2333 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
dviola has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.7.1]
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
halo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hg has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<jamesob>
sipa: is the tapleaf version 0xC0 declared as a constant anywhere in the code? can't find it
<achow101>
I think it's clear that there is disagreement that vasild should be added as a maintainer, and so by that basis alone, should not be due to lack of consensus
<michaelfolkson>
What is the reasoning?
<michaelfolkson>
And why can't fanquake and/or glozow comment on the PR?
<achow101>
however, this is basically new territory for us, as far as I can remember, all previous maintainers were added without any disagreement at all
<michaelfolkson>
I'm assuming given the secrecy vasild supposedly has some dark secrets that we can't discuss
<michaelfolkson>
Or that fanquake and glozow don't value discussing anything in public
<michaelfolkson>
The silence is absurd
<michaelfolkson>
What are next steps? Just let fanquake and glozow block whatever they want without disclosing why?
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<sipa>
Previous maintainers were also all selected because existing maintainers saw a need, and nominated somewhere. It's unclear to me where this is coming from here.
<michaelfolkson>
I get you're neutral sipa but the other maintainers have ACKed it, many long term contributors have ACKed it. fanquake and glozow have to have a reason
<achow101>
I think the removal of the net_processing scope was part of that, it doesn't address the concerns regarding review participation (or lack thereof)
<michaelfolkson>
This can't be how the project is managed going forward
<michaelfolkson>
It isn't fair on vasild
<michaelfolkson>
Concerns were raised with glozow when she became maintainer and that was merged within days
<michaelfolkson>
Ok so some suggestions for next steps?
<achow101>
iirc they were addressed, sufficiently that those who raised them ack'd
<michaelfolkson>
Close the PR? Wait for fanquake and glozow to decide the next maintainer?
<michaelfolkson>
And provide no rationale for their choice?
<_aj_>
next steps? stop trying to make vasild a maintainer when there's no particular need, work on making good PRs and reviewing them
instagibbs has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sipa>
I'm mostly neutral on vasild being added. I'm not neutral on a maintainer being added in the first place - without having a discussion about why another one is needed, I don't understand why we're having this discussion in the first place.
<michaelfolkson>
Ok so comment on the PR sipa and _aj_ that another maintainer isn't needed and NACK it
<vasild>
some opinions on the PR state that the p2p/networking area is so big that it warrants two maintainers...
<MacroFake>
michaelfolkson: sipa already said that on the pull
<michaelfolkson>
MacroFake: He didn't NACK it
<instagibbs>
mic check (sorry)
<achow101>
instagibbs: working
<MacroFake>
michaelfolkson: I think it is rude to request others to NACK a pull
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<sipa>
No, that is not what I'm saying. I'm not NACKing vasild, nor am I NACKing adding another maintainer. I'm saying I'd want to see a discussion about whether another one is needed. I haven
<sipa>
't seen that discussion.
<michaelfolkson>
I think it is rude for a potential maintainer to be sitting there for 5 months not knowing what is going on
<lightlike>
wasn't the original reason that laanwj (who was doing much of the merging in net) stopped being a maintainer?
<vasild>
lightlike: yes, that was
<sipa>
And as far as I'm concerned, it's existing maintainers who have to answer that question.
<michaelfolkson>
I think it is rude for 2 maintainers to just ignore a PR for a new maintainer with so many ACKs
<michaelfolkson>
And ignore requests for them to comment and appear at meetings
<_aj_>
i've only found it hard to get review of changes in net; not merges once review's passed.
<michaelfolkson>
Well the sabotage of Vasil being maintainer, yeah maybe
<michaelfolkson>
You saying fanquake and glozow are CIA _aj_?
<sipa>
wtf
<MacroFake>
(slightly off topic: let's not mix up the low level net scope and the higher level p2p net processing scope, while there is overlap, they are largely different modules)
<vasild>
If existent maintainers think there is no need for a new one, maybe it would be good to state so. And maybe some maintainer to claim that area? Btw that would put the discussion whether my "skills" are tuned to p2p or just networking in a strange light.
<achow101>
michaelfolkson: why is it so important tht vasild become maintainer to you? Is it about him specifically or about the process?
<achow101>
I could just nack and close the pr if it makes you feel better ...
<michaelfolkson>
achow101: Vasil is being treated awfully. I hated when Luke was treated badly during Taproot activation and hate this
<michaelfolkson>
Some people think they can do whatever they want and don't need to tell anyone anything. On a supposedly open source project
<michaelfolkson>
If everyone else is happy with it then I'm in the minority
<michaelfolkson>
But I wouldn't blame Vasil for moving on to other things. The communication is a joke
<achow101>
frankly, I think opinions aren't being shared because of potential backlash from aggressive users such as yourself and bytes1440000
<michaelfolkson>
Ok move on to the next topic then
<_aj_>
the only lowish level net PR on high pri or PR status projects is #25515 which is in draft. adding #26837 might be a more productive step?
<gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25515 | net, test: Virtualise CConnman and add initial PeerManager unit tests by dergoegge · Pull Request #25515 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<michaelfolkson>
I will consider Bitcoin Core a project where fanquake and glozow can make whatever decisions they want without communicating why from now on. I didn't think it was that way but apparently it is
<vasild>
would be nice if 26837 makes it to the next release
<dergoegge>
#25515 can be removed from high-prio, gotta get around to updating it (it got quite a few concept acks, which is what i wanted)
<gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25515 | net, test: Virtualise CConnman and add initial PeerManager unit tests by dergoegge · Pull Request #25515 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<lightlike>
or even have 26837 as a backport candidate? (if it actually helps the stabililty of the i2p network)
<achow101>
The pr this is pulled from was closed due to lack of intereset. I suspect the same will happen again
<MacroFake>
Looks like people can leave a comment on the pull, unless there is a need to discuss something on IRC?
<achow101>
I think he just wants to bring attention to it
<achow101>
michaelfolkson: I presume your proposed topic was sufficiently discussed already?
<michaelfolkson>
achow101: Indeed
<achow101>
does anyone have anything else they would like to discuss?
<_aj_>
unrelatedly, is there any way to do pushes so that github better detects that PR's were merged, so they get the purple colour instead of the red colour? eg #26856 or #26827? maybe push to the repo the PR was from first, and delay for a few minutes before also pushing to the other (gui/main) one?
<jamesob>
any good reason we don't have granular, optional logging in the script interpreter? Is it performance thing?
<jamesob>
*is it a
<_aj_>
for script debugging?
<sipa>
have you tried btcdeb?
<jamesob>
_aj_: yeah. sipa: yeah, sort of, but I found it inconvenient I couldn't just feed in hex (afaict?)
<achow101>
jamesob: because the only people who need that are those write scripts by hand and they're insane :p
<jamesob>
achow101: haha
<jamesob>
sipa: if there's some good workflow for going from python CScripts -> btcdeb, I'd be curious to know
<sipa>
I don't know, just wanted to make sure you were aware of the tool.
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
kmartin85 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hashfunc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Talkless has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
dviola has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.7.1]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
dviola has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.8]
coreyphillips has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
MrFrancis has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
halo has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.8]
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
b_101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hakinser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
b_101_ has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hakinser has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
bytes1440000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<bytes1440000>
Sorry I was not available in the meeting for some personal reasons. Many things that I would like to respond to however I had some points written for meeting earlier which I want to share.
<bytes1440000>
I don't see any downsides of adding vasild as new maintainer and here are the positives after evaluating PR which has sufficient ACKs from maintainers and contributors:
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
<bytes1440000>
1. A project like bitcoin core that is considered one of the top 10 critical open source C++ project would get a maintainer for module that matters the most for a bitcoin node after QA
<bytes1440000>
2. Vasild and other contributors would be motivated even if took a few months
<bytes1440000>
3. Hopefully we can get more reviews in some p2p/net pull requests helping in close some of the open requests and encouraging contributors to improve things further with more PRs
<bytes1440000>
4. It will be a fair decision considering number of ACKs and disagreements being addressed in the pull request by author
<bytes1440000>
- Looking for overall feedback on adding this doc with minimal info
<bytes1440000>
- 'call for maintainers' section could be added if enough contributors agree
<bytes1440000>
- Can change 'selection' to a better word if there is any suggestion. A maintainers.md file with list of maintainers and basic stuff about role, adding new maintainer etc. does not affect this project in any negative way.
MrFrancis has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<bytes1440000>
Positives:
<bytes1440000>
1. Transparency
<bytes1440000>
2. New contributors would be aware of the process
<bytes1440000>
3. Less misinformation about bitcoin core and maintainers
<bytes1440000>
4. Could help in improving things related to maintainers for this project if we agree on some updates to this doc in future or current pull request
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
vasild has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
AmunRa has quit [Remote host closed the connection]