<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master fa9be2f MarcoFalke: lint: [doc] Clarify Windows line endings (CR LF) not to be used
<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 59b773f merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#30010: lint: [doc] Clarify Windows line endings (CR ...
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #30010: lint: [doc] Clarify Windows line endings (CR LF) not to be used (master...2405-lint-win-crlf-) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30010
<achow101>
There are 2 preproposed meeting topics this week. Any last minute ones to add?
<willcl-ark>
Hi
<stickies-v>
hi
<theStack>
hi
Wronsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<achow101>
#topic package relay updates (glozow)
<Murch[m]>
Hi
<pinheadmz>
oh, hi mark
<glozow>
#28970 was merged (yay!) and a followup is open: #30012
<glozow>
#30000 is the next PR in the "p2p track" though relatively small. I'm currently working on addressing some feedback on it. The next one will be TxDownloadManager which I am almost done rebasing.
<sdaftuar>
since last week, i was able to rebase PR #28676, which i did and then eventually got CI happy (nice tests everyone). since then, it needs to be rebased again, which i'm working on
<sdaftuar>
i was also able to get a draft reimplementation of mini-miner that makes sense post-cluster mempool -- figuring that out was one of my todo's but i don't think it will need to be part of the initial cluster mempool PR
<sdaftuar>
hwoever, happy to share that with anyone who is interested (and can open a draft PR that builds on #28676)
<pinheadmz>
for a test, i uploaded these guidelines to GPT and instructed it to evaluate some comments with either "OK" or "needs moderation" then fed it some comments from the datacarrier PR. The results were amazing, only one false positive
<darosior>
pinheadmz: hah, neat
<glozow>
pinheadmz: woah cool
<pinheadmz>
i already have webhooks from the repo for telegram and IRC bots, i could send all comments to the bot to at least help flag incidents
<achow101>
pinheadmz: you mean you agreed with all of it's decisions except for one?
<pinheadmz>
achow101 correct, it flagged a long comment by Murch[m] as "needs moderation" which i disagreed with
<sipa>
pinheadmz: does that mean that "you" are volunteering for the role of moderator?
<pinheadmz>
sipa yes
<josie>
ajonas: looks great on first read, only one that jumps out to me as potentially hard to reason about is "contains false statements"
<ajonas>
i think it'd be healthy to have more than 1 volunteer
gmaxwell has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
<glozow>
can we volunteer other people?
<luke-jr>
seems like some moderation outcomes could require context
<pinheadmz>
luke-jr of course and just to be clear, I would only use GPT to get my attention, then use my brain to make decisions
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<achow101>
if you have comments on the guidelines, please leave them as a comment on the gist
<glozow>
fwiw I'm in favor of pinheadmz being one of the moderators!
<achow101>
i'd like for us to discuss who to add as moderators in a week or two after the guidelines have had some review
<josie>
+1 on pinheadmz, they've already been operating in a similar role with issue triage (and doing a fantastic job)
<glozow>
my bad! sounds good
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<willcl-ark>
I'd be happy to volunteer myself to help with that too if helpful
<pinheadmz>
+1 for willcl-ark
Chris_Stewart_5 has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<hebasto>
+1 for willcl-ark
<ajonas>
josie: yes, I think it's directionally correct but suggestions welcome
<josie>
+1 for willcl-ark (who is also doing a great job in the issue triaging role, which feels like it has some overlap with moderation)
<stickies-v>
+1 for pinheadmz and willcl-ark , thank you
<achow101>
#topic Knots use of the Bitcoin Core project on Transifex.com (hebasto)
<hebasto>
hi
<hebasto>
To translate the GUI, we use Transifex, both a website and command-line tools.
<hebasto>
The history of recent events is as follow:
<hebasto>
2024-03-24 -- a new file 'knots-translation-26x' was added to the project bitcoin
<hebasto>
There were no announcements or any preliminary discussions with people who are related to GUI translation.
<hebasto>
I asked luke-jr on IRC the same day. His response was "yes, there's been some interest in translating the strings missing in Core too; bonus this could mean when those things get merged into Core, there's already a translation ready to go"
<hebasto>
2024-04-26 The file 'Bitcoin Knots 26.x' in project 'bitcoin' was updated with new content.
Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<hebasto>
People - Bitcoin Core translators - on Transifex started to complain: "If the bitcoin-knots ressources are supposed to belong the a forked project of bitcoin-core (bitcoin-knots), i would prefer a new project being setup here on Transifex, since its kinda hijacking the main bitcoin core project and binding translation effort from members who want to support the bitcoin core project from my impression."
<hebasto>
I asked luke-jr on IRC to remove Knots resources from Transifex. Still no response from him.
<hebasto>
That's it.
<hebasto>
The question is should we allow to use the Bitcoin Core on Transifex.com by any other project?
<achow101>
I agree that the knots translation should be separate from bitcoin core's
<sipa>
I don't see why the Bitcoin Core transifex project should cater to translations of other projects.
<luke-jr>
I received no such request, and the complaints sound like trolling
msc__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<luke-jr>
and the transifex project is not exclusively Bitcoin Core's to begin with
<achow101>
I don't think it makes sense for us to support forks, even though there is likely to be significant overlap
<achow101>
luke-jr: how so?
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<dergoegge>
achow101: +1
<laanwj>
i agree, please split off the transifex for different software, it's confusing for users and for us
<luke-jr>
It's the same software, just different releases
<laanwj>
if it's the same software you can just use our translations, no need to add a project :)
<luke-jr>
it's just another resource, like any other release
<stickies-v>
+1 for splitting off, our project should be just for Bitcoin Core, not forks
<luke-jr>
Bitcoin Knots is part of the Bitcoin Core project anyway
<dergoegge>
lol
<achow101>
no it isn't
<josie>
luke-jr: not its not?
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<achow101>
we don't make releases for it. we don't review prs for it. it's not listed on bitcoincore.org
<luke-jr>
yes we do
<sipa>
luke-jr: *you* do, because it is your project
<lightlike>
+1 to removing from transifex
<sdaftuar>
why do we need luke to do anything? how do permissions work with transifex?
<glozow>
+1, I don't think we should do translations for Bitcoin Knots within Bitcoin Core transifex
* darosior
blinks - thinks "no this is indeed real"
<hebasto>
there are 4 admins: laanwj hebasto luke-jr and seone
<luke-jr>
if you want to be trolls, you can make your own transifex project instead of trying to hijack this one; I didn't give laanwj access for that reason
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<achow101>
luke-jr: how is this trolling?
<sdaftuar>
hebasto: ah thank you for explaining
<luke-jr>
achow101: there is zero reason to have separate projects
<achow101>
I don't think anyone else has ever had the understanding that knots and core are part of the same project
<luke-jr>
both Core and Knots benefit from using the same one
BrandonOdiwuor has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<laanwj>
it's just because the history of the transifex project is somewhat weird, it used to be owned by a person. we don't even know, i think Warren Togami transferred it to me at some point
<laanwj>
(well not him, he knows someone there)
<luke-jr>
no, I gave you access
<sdaftuar>
luke-jr: frankly i think your position is absurd
<hebasto>
ah, and wtogami is also a transifex maintainer
<sipa>
I think it's been abundantly clear to anyone that the bitcoin project on transfex is bitcoin core's translation - it mentions that software in the description, and links to the bitcoincore.org website
msc__ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<sipa>
And I don't see the benefit to Bitcoin Core of having the Knots translations be part of the same project.
<achow101>
the benefit is only because knots merges in prs before they've been reviewed or finished, and includes several things that are unlikely to be merged into core. the benefit to knots is of course that you can reuse our translation files, but you should already be able to do that anyways
<pinheadmz>
what do the bitcoin forks use ?
<luke-jr>
sipa: having translations ready in advance of PRs being merged into Core
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<achow101>
this seems like it would add an additional burden on translators as they would be prompted to translate strings that won't show up in Core, or may change in the future because the pr is unfinished, or have to translate multiple versions of essentially the same string
<sdaftuar>
luke-jr: presumably that also wastes translator time when translation needs changed during PR review
<achow101>
pinheadmz: their own transifex if they even bother with translations
<achow101>
(or some other translation platform entirely)
<sipa>
luke-jr: fair enough, that's a tiny advantage; but it also means wasting translator's time on changes that don't end up in Bitcoin Core in the same form, or never at all
<darosior>
people who are actually doing the work have complained about this luke-jr, why should you insist on putting the burden on them for your own project while they explicitly don't consent?
<luke-jr>
darosior: they're free to not do it, it's clearly marked as Knots
<sipa>
Bitcoin Knots is clearly a different project, with different maintainer(s), different focus, different code; it's not Bitcoin Core's contributors/translators job to assist with that.
<hebasto>
darosior: not about luke-jr but about knots resources to translate
<luke-jr>
darosior: I haven't seen any such complaints, but I doubt it's many compared to number of people involved
<luke-jr>
sipa: it's produced with the same development process/contributors as Core
<darosior>
It's these complaints which sparked this discussion in the first place
<sipa>
luke-jr: lol
<luke-jr>
and Transifex/bitcoin is not Bitcoin Core's exclusively
<achow101>
hebasto: were these complaints made in private? It doesn't seem like transifex has some kind of discussion area
<sdaftuar>
i don't think the legitimacy of our project should be used to lend credibility to Bitcoin Knots
<sipa>
sdaftuar: +1
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<Earnestly>
darosior: Do you have any links to them?
<hebasto>
transifex has internal messaging sysytem
<darosior>
Earnestly: cf hebasto's comment above
<Earnestly>
Oh, so they're not public?
<josie>
luke-jr: you taking the position that core and knots are the same project is odd considering publicly ive seen you refer to them as separate projects
<darosior>
sdaftuar: +1
<hebasto>
Earnestly: no
<achow101>
luke-jr: when I go to the project, the description says "Bitcoin Core". The homepage link goes to bitcoincore.org. I don't see how that is not indicative that it is exclusively for Bitcoin Core
<achow101>
the translation instructions go to our repo
<laanwj>
yes...
<Earnestly>
darosior: Mostly curious because this was prompted not by complaints but by hebasto noticing "a new file 'knots-translation-26x'" without mentioning complaints
<vasild>
Well, I think that at this point it is obvious that luke-jr is at odds with others, will not change his mind and will not cooperate.
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<darosior>
vasild: +1 this is not going anywhere
<Earnestly>
vasild: To be fair, what cooporation has been offered?
<sdaftuar>
based on this, i don't think luke should have admin rights over any aspect of our project, including the transifex site. i will let others weigh in on how best to achieve that.
<brunoerg>
vasild: +1
<achow101>
In any case, it seems like everyone here disagrees with luke and think the resource should be removed, so we should just do that
<vasild>
Earnestly: by cooperate, I mean to remove the knots file from the translation site (I assume he added it there)
<Earnestly>
So much for coorporation; do it our way or we'll just remove you
<luke-jr>
sdaftuar: you are now attempting a hostile takeover of the Transifex project
<dergoegge>
achow101: +1
<sdaftuar>
sdaftuar: i have no admin rights there
<sdaftuar>
(oops, i'm talkin gto myself!)
<laanwj>
sdaftuari agree, luke-jr doesn't seem reasonable about it, even if everyone in the project wants it to change
<sdaftuar>
luke-jr: i have no authority to remove you myself, but yes i'm expressing support to remove you, or suggesting you step down
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<achow101>
Earnestly: I don't understand what you mean by "cooperate". Either it's there or it isn't, or do you have some third alternative in mind?
<Earnestly>
achow101: Just leaving it alone, there's no evidence of harm
<achow101>
also, in hebasto's opening statement "People - Bitcoin Core translators - on Transifex started to complain"
<Earnestly>
Or create a new transifex project for bitcoin core specifically
<Earnestly>
achow101: Yes, but it would be nice to have evidence
<sipa>
Earnestly: we have one; that's the one we are talking about, obviously
pablomartin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sipa>
it's ludicrous to suddenly assert that the transifex is also for Knots, or even that Core and Knots are the same project altogether.
<Earnestly>
sipa: It's just called "bitcoin", I was suggesting creating a "bitcoin core" project
<achow101>
Earnestly: other than luke's assertions, there's no indication that this transifex project is not Bitcoin Core's exclusively
<josie>
Earnestly: since knots was added recently (for the first time?) seems much easier to create a knots specific transifix project
<vasild>
Earnestly: github's repo is also only "bitcoin": github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
<sipa>
Earnestly: for historic reasons, that is the URL for the Bitcoin Core github project, and the same holds for Transfix
<stickies-v>
+1 on removing the knots resource and luke-jr's admin rights if that's possible, this conversation is absurd
<sipa>
*Transifex
<Earnestly>
vasild: Sure, but it's called bitcoin core now, that was its historical name. It appears the transifex project similarly has a longer history than bitcoin core as it has come to be
<josie>
Earnestly: knots aside, are you advocating that the transifex project is a catch all for *any* bitcoin software (e.g. btcd)
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<Earnestly>
josie: No I think it should have its own project, operated and controlled by the same people
<sipa>
let's please not get further in the rabbithole of discussing URLs, that's really a separate discussion
<Earnestly>
josie: Which would avoid this entire situation
<achow101>
anyways, I think we've answered hebasto's question.
<achow101>
Any other topics to discuss?
<vasild>
luke-jr: "sdaftuar: you are now attempting a hostile takeover of the Transifex project" -- when people cannot reach an agreement, what other options are there? The current situation can be viewed as a hostile hijack of the bitcoin core's translation by bitcoin knots
<Earnestly>
vasild: (To be fair, this channel has been nothing but hostile to luke-jr for as long as I've seen it; perhaps warrented, but also means constantly defensive)
msc_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<darosior>
Earnestly: that's not fair.
<instagibbs>
I've seen no assumptions of bad faith except by luke-jr 🤷
<luke-jr>
josie: especially if they share most strings, I don't see why not
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<achow101>
#endmeeting
<luke-jr>
vasild: no, it cannot be. Bitcoin Core is welcome to continue using it.
<vasild>
hijack, not takeover
<luke-jr>
on another note, what's the current place for cmake dev?
<glozow>
There are 10ks of forks of bitcoin core, and many of them release software with similar code and probably similar strings to translate. That doesn't mean they should all be translated on the bitcoin core transifex...
Emc99 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
<Earnestly>
Making a bitcoin core specific transifex project would solve all of these issues (surely you can migrate all of bitcoin to it as well?)
<luke-jr>
Earnestly: there aren't any actual issues to begin with, tho
<achow101>
transifex's interface is rather obtuse, I don't know if any such a migration would be possible without losing data
<achow101>
(not an admin, so there may be other options availble to admins)
<Earnestly>
luke-jr: I can see why they would disagree though, a lot of the old infrastructure was merged into what is now "bitcoin core", this seems like a loose end in the process
<Earnestly>
luke-jr: I mean, would it be fair for any one of the bitcoin core maintainers to host their forks on it as well?
<luke-jr>
Earnestly: there's no reason to have this hard break between Core and Knots to begin with
<Earnestly>
And thus exclude forks outside of this
<luke-jr>
Earnestly: ?
<lightlike>
luke-jr: yes, there is. knots is a one-person project without a community, and, as a result zero public code review. In my opinion, it is a security disaster waiting to happen and no one should ever use it for anything involving actual funds. Of course people should use whatever they want, but bitcoin core should be in no associate itself with it or help it.
<Earnestly>
luke-jr: What is the scope of bitcoin transifex if it can include both core and knots? Seems a bit odd
<luke-jr>
lightlike: that's just false bigotry
<luke-jr>
Earnestly: no reason not to include others as well, they all benefit
<Earnestly>
Okay that's clearer then
<luke-jr>
besides new strings, when people correct one, they correct them all etc
<luke-jr>
had they been separate, various fixes I did recently like </ b> to </b> wouldn't get into Core
<Earnestly>
Assuming a fork doesn't give new meaning to an option or so
Guest29 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<luke-jr>
Earnestly: even if it did, the description would be a different string anyway
<achow101>
poking around in the settings of a different transifex org I do admin, it looks like orgs and projects can be renamed
<achow101>
but of course that has a likelihood of breaking links
<luke-jr>
I don't intend to rename this one
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Earnestly>
Anyway, this is clearer now. The transifex project is indeed welcome to any and all forks, so that translators from those might benefit core and everything else as byproduct
<Earnestly>
glozow: If that answers your question about 10k forks, theoretically all of them can use it
<sipa>
Earnestly: ... wat
<achow101>
that's insane
<achow101>
if for whatever reason people think that because of the name, then we should rename it
<sr_gi[m]>
Earnestly: who has agreed on that?
<Earnestly>
Yeah it is a bit weird I agree
<Earnestly>
sr_gi[m]: It's luke-jr's decision
<achow101>
it's not his project
<Earnestly>
Seems to be de facto
<sdaftuar>
huh?
<sipa>
huh?
<glozow>
???
<achow101>
hebasto and laanwj are admins too
<Earnestly>
But aren't able to do anything about this?
<sipa>
Earnestly: yes they are
<achow101>
no, I think hebasto was being polite and asking everyone before doing anything
<sr_gi[m]>
Earnestly: Which he has not any rights to make on his own?
<sipa>
we're trying to come to a friendly agreement by discussing things here
<sr_gi[m]>
s/not/no/, s/any//
<Earnestly>
sipa: Ah, I was under the impression that they could not rename it or remove things
<luke-jr>
sipa: seems more like various are trying to bully me and perform a hostile takeover
<sipa>
luke-jr: i'm sorry you feel that way, but that's just your point of view
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Earnestly>
luke-jr: I'm surprised that different transifex projects can't share translations, so to have a bitcoin core and a bitcoin knots as separate projects but still able to share a set difference of the translations
<achow101>
_aj_: now it says "Bitcoin Core & Knots"
<achow101>
that seems like a hostile takeover
<sipa>
achow101: agreed
<kanzure>
hi
<glozow>
so they all have the same admin access, but the difference is that luke-jr will do things unilaterally, while the others will discuss openly with others beforehand
<sdaftuar>
yes i think it's clear in which direction a hostile takeover is happening
<luke-jr>
you complained the descriptions were confusing
<dergoegge>
lol
<sipa>
luke-jr: it's not about the descriptions; it's that everyone, since forever, has considered the "bitcoin" project on Transifex to be Bitcoin Core's.
<kanzure>
are transifex projects able to be forked?
<sipa>
one sign of that is that since forever it has been described that way
<sr_gi[m]>
luke-jr: So you went ahead and did whatever the hell you wanted to without any agreement. That doesn't look like a hostile takeover at all
<achow101>
kanzure: not explicitly
<glozow>
iiuc you can download the files and import them to a new project? though unsure whether you lose things when you do that
<kanzure>
okay, well, sounds like something we might want to think about developing a capability for in the future
* Earnestly
still thinks an explicitly bitcoin core project would be crystal clear than this strange "bitcoin umbrella" project
<luke-jr>
sr_gi[m]: I acted on the feedback
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<sipa>
come on, this is ridiculous
<luke-jr>
sr_gi[m]: hardly a takeover when it's been "my" project all along
<luke-jr>
(if you're going to insist on drawing such lines)
sliv3r__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<luke-jr>
sipa: the whole discussion has been ridiculous
<luke-jr>
there's ZERO reason to troll about this to begin with
<sipa>
luke-jr: yes, you insisting that the bitcoin project on transifex ought to include Knots is ridiculous
<luke-jr>
translators can CLEARLY see which resources are Knots or Core
<Earnestly>
sipa: (Not just knots, every fork)
<luke-jr>
if they really want to only work on Core, they can just do that
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sipa>
luke-jr: clearly several Bitcoin Core contributors do not want to see it associated with Knots, myself included
<kanzure>
what does it mean for it to be associated with knots? i don't know if i understand, besides the unilateral name change has anything else changed?
<achow101>
kanzure: luke has uploaded a resources file for knots strings to be translated
<kanzure>
okay, and is the usual thing for forks to have a separate transifex project?
<kanzure>
if they do not, what is different or what consequences are there?
<achow101>
yes. afaict since the transifex project was created, it has only hosted resource from Bitcoin Core
pablomartin has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<luke-jr>
kanzure: both Core and Knots benefit from them sharing the same repo; there's apparently just a translator and several devs who are bigots
<dergoegge>
needs moderation
<luke-jr>
achow101: iirc it used to also have bitcoin.org translations
<achow101>
the consequences is that some translators were confused by this
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<Earnestly>
It'd be useful to have known what those concerns actually were
<Earnestly>
(My rather meaningless position here is to have a transifex project for just bitcoin core, explicitly so.)
<luke-jr>
[10:22] <hebasto> The history of recent events is as follow: [10:22] <hebasto> 2024-03-24 -- a new file 'knots-translation-26x' was added to the project bitcoin <-- btw, this isn't the actual start; first was I was asked to make it available by a translator
<sipa>
Earnestly: WE HAD THAT
<Earnestly>
sipa: Until it was tested, unfortunately :/
<luke-jr>
sipa: there were no actual concerns stated
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
preimage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sipa>
luke-jr: I'm sorry you feel the way you do, but this discussion is pointless.
<luke-jr>
ok, but I'm going to leave things as they are.
msc_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<kanzure>
luke-jr: by bigoted you mean something about knots being a fork and therefore shouldn't have a separate translations security boundary? i'm not sure i follow.
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<luke-jr>
kanzure: I mean they are just anti-Knots for no reason
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sr_gi[m]>
The no reason: Knots being single a dev project, having no review process and a completely different set of guarantees, yet you keep pretending it the same project as Bitcoin Core "but another release"
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<luke-jr>
sr_gi[m]: It's no more single dev, than Core is 5 dev
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Wronsk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Wronsk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Wronsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
bugs_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sr_gi[m]>
Oh so the development process is not: take Core codebase, revert anything you don't like, add anything you like, advertise it as a different release?
<Sjors[m]>
laanwj gmaxwell: I also understood, but just wanted more :-)
sliv3r__ has quit [Quit: Client closed]
<ryanofsky>
if there is a technical issue here, i think it would be helpful if someone would make a github issue describing what the specific problem is and what are potential solutions are. it seems to me if luke just added a separate, clearly labeled file for knots-specific translations, we wouldn't merge it and it would be unlikely to cause confusion for translators?
sliv3r__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
ghost43 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<luke-jr>
sr_gi[m]: Core's current de facto process is merging anything the 5 devs like and closing anything they don't.
ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<luke-jr>
ryanofsky: exactly
<achow101>
ryanofsky: this discussion is prompted by some translators complaining about it to hebasto
<achow101>
luke-jr: even if that were the case, the 5 devs are not a monolith
<sdaftuar>
achow101: ryanofsky: more than that, though, there is an issue of associating with the Bitcoin Core project to lend legitimacy to other projects.
<luke-jr>
achow101: I see no correction of glozow's abuse a few weeks ago
<achow101>
that doesn't mean we don't sometimes agree together
<hebasto>
wtogami laanwj and hebasto have been removed from maintainers on transifex. luke-jr can you explain?
<achow101>
and sometimes we disagree
<sdaftuar>
ok sounds like we need to move to a new transifex project
<luke-jr>
hebasto: you were never on there; laanwj seemed to be agreeing with a hostile takeover; and warren has not been active so it seemed like good housecleaning while I was in there
<Sjors[m]>
Translation coup?
<hebasto>
luke-jr: " you were never on there; " -- that's untrue
<luke-jr>
hebasto: no, it isn't untrue
<glozow>
luke-jr: can you be more specific about what I did that was "abuse" ?
<ryanofsky>
achow101, i guess it's not clear if they were complaining about just the presence of the file, or some more specific confusion that would be caused?
<emzy>
FWIW (german translator) I will not help to translate Bitcoin Knots and ignore it.
<luke-jr>
emzy: nobody is suggesting you should be forced to
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<Sjors[m]>
That PR had a well reasoned NACK and ~0 chance of getting merged, sufficient reason for a maintainer to close it.
<luke-jr>
no, it iddn't
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Sjors[m]>
luke-jr: you're entitled to that opinion, but if you use it as grounds to kick people out of projects you have control over, then it makes sense that we fork away from them
<instagibbs>
as you know we discussed this with almost 40 contributors, no one but you actively wants to contribute in that direction. It's dead for this repo.
<luke-jr>
Sjors[m]: you're conflating different things now
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<Sjors[m]>
luke-jr: maybe I misunderstand, but I though you said you revoked laanwj's admin rights on Transifex because he agree with glozow closing your PR?
<luke-jr>
Sjors[m]: no, because he was talking here about performing a hostile takeover of the org
<Sjors[m]>
* thought, agreed - my d and t keys are broken? :-)
<luke-jr>
if laanwj states he will not do so, can restore
<Sjors[m]>
By "hostile takeover" you mean removing your control over it?
BrandonOdiwuor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<luke-jr>
Sjors[m]: yes, considering I was the project maintainer
<achow101>
really? it looks like hebasto has been the one who has been uploading and annoucing our new resource files for the past several years, in addition to the merging of translations to the repo
<stickies-v>
hebasto: nice, thank you for fixing this
<luke-jr>
hebasto: care to clarify whether seone was involved, or you're exploiting an internal connection within Transifex?
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Lockesmith has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
vasild has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<luke-jr>
achow101: yes, really; revisionism is not appreciated
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<laanwj>
it isn't revisionism, it just isn't about the past, it's about who is active now
<luke-jr>
laanwj: I am active now
Lockesmith has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<laanwj>
which would be fine if you weren't trying to use it for another project
<luke-jr>
it's fine period
<luke-jr>
you are performing a hostile takeover
<luke-jr>
for no reason other than bigotry
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Earnestly>
It's a pity that transifex doesn't seem to have a notion of "forks" such that one project can simply merge in translations from one project to theirs as one might with git. All of these problems are technical limitations
<stickies-v>
luke-jr: no, everyone in the meeting disagreed with you and then you tried to kick out the other maintainers. luckily that failed, and things now are pretty much as they were again
<laanwj>
how so? if i, or hebasto, were to make a bitcoin fork and used my remaining access to add it to the existing project resources, it'd be exactly the same situation...
<luke-jr>
stickies-v: I removed people who I had given access and one who was planning a hostile takeover
<luke-jr>
laanwj: I didn't add it to the existing project resources, I added an entirely new one, clearly noted as such
<laanwj>
we're trying to cooperate here, not ego trip
<luke-jr>
laanwj: a hostile takeover is not cooperation
cguida has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<glozow>
luke-jr: I've responded to you on the PR.
<Sjors[m]>
Ok, so sdaftuar said "the resource should be removed" (i.e. the Knots file), which Earnestly interpreted as "luke should be removed", which sdaftuar then clarified was also fine with him, seconded by stickies-v . This seems to have led luke-jr to preemptively remove two other admins.
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Sjors[m]>
I think it makes sense to split the translations. Even if the knots file itself is separate, it's not hard to imagine having arguments in the future about translations of topics related to spam.
<luke-jr>
Sjors[m]: as the maintainer, I do not agree with removing any obviously
msc_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Wronsk has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
cguida_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
cguida has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<Sjors[m]>
The next release isn't for several months, so imo there's no need to rush - even if a split seems inevitable.
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<warren>
I skimmed the above chat. As I have not been helpful to the project recently I'm staying out of this disagreement.
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<luke-jr>
:/
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
zeropoint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
PaperSword has quit [Quit: PaperSword]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
PaperSword has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<laanwj>
@sjors i just saw your comment here https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/guix/+bug/2064115 , the python issue is weird, yes it may be a version issue--i think ubuntu 24.04 is supposed to use Python 3.12.3. That said i've never seen anything call _ in python... as i understood it's a special variable that means "last value" in the interpreter
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Sjors[m]>
laanwj: I'll look up the Ubuntu default Python and try that.
<warren>
I'm being asked to override the majority developer decision with respect to transifex. irrespective of how admin access was originally given in 2014, I think one developer shouldn't be able to unilaterally decide differently. If they did nothing stops the others from abandoning that repo and doing the work in a new repo.
<warren>
That being said I haven't been involved for years so my opinion shouldn't matter.
<luke-jr>
The people in the discussion earlier do not constitute a majority of devs, and meetings here are explicitly not supposed to make decisions.
<luke-jr>
if Core wants to abandon the repo that I have maintained for over a decade, they can, but it's still an absurd idea to do so
cguida_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<luke-jr>
again, there are ZERO downsides to both projects using it, and benefits to both
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
pablomartin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<luke-jr>
the only "argument" against it is bigotry
<luke-jr>
warren: even if your opinion shouldn't matter (which makes sense), mine should as the maintainer of it
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<warren>
if my opinion doesn't matter why are you trying to convince me?
<luke-jr>
because afaik you de facto have the ability to restore things to how they should be
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Guest76 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest76 has quit [Client Quit]
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Wronsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #30024: doc: replace remaining "520" magic nums with MAX_SCRIPT_ELEMENT_SIZE (master...2024-05-MAX_SCRIPT_ELEMENT_SIZE) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30024
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<luke-jr>
update: apparently seone sent me a message a few weeks ago (that I missed) asking me to move Knots off the Transifex, so I must concede on that point; though it's still ridiculous
<luke-jr>
seems there isn't a viable way to use a separate project on Transifex either, so this is just going to screw over Knots completely for no reason
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
sliv3r__ has quit [Quit: Client closed]
blockdyor has quit [Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
<luke-jr>
(though it's noteworthy the particular devs here who advocated for and performed the hostile takeover were NOT aware of this, so you guys still need to apologize at the very least)
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<luke-jr>
[10:23] <hebasto> I asked luke-jr on IRC to remove Knots resources from Transifex. Still no response from him. <-- also don't see this anywhere still
<luke-jr>
sdaftuar: ah, thanks. (I was looking in DMs)
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
blockdyor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<vasild>
luke-jr: I respect you and I am not against Knots. Trying to look at this objectively. Is it not the case that none of the devs here or the maintainers on transifex did anything other than expressing their opinion in this chat. Then you removed all maintainers except yourself. Now you say that "the particular devs who advocated for and performed the hostile takeover". I don't get it.
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<vasild>
The way I see it _you_ performed a takeover (or tried to). I guess that in your opinion it was not hostile, but good-minded.
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<luke-jr>
vasild: It's not a takeover when I was maintaining it for over a decade already. I was not chasing anyone out, yet people here were saying they intended to chase Knots and even myself out.
<luke-jr>
All I did was protect the project by temporarily removing laanwj's access to perform such an attack.
<laanwj>
i mean at this point it's clear to me that you can't be trusted with things like this
<luke-jr>
I'm not the one who behaved inappropriately
<luke-jr>
(would be nice to know who it was)
<laanwj>
i don't see it as hostile so much as childish
<luke-jr>
laanwj: do you deny that you said things which could be construed as potentially attempting a takeover to remove Knots?
<vasild>
luke-jr: for me, "takeover" is when one maintainer removes all other maintainers without their consent and without prior notice.
kexkey has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<laanwj>
i dunno... at some point if everyone agrees that you're doing something wrong, it might be your that is wrong
<luke-jr>
vasild: I temporarily removed laanwj for justifiable reasons; and warren was inactive; I left seone because I wasn't sure of his activity or lack thereof.
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<luke-jr>
laanwj: it might be, or it might be that "everyone" is not actually everyone, and are biased
<laanwj>
i'm done with this discussion though, i'm capable of hosting my own infrastructure if needed, i don't need anything from you
<luke-jr>
laanwj: again, I was not the one trying to deny anyone use of infra, you were
<luke-jr>
/are
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<Sjors[m]>
Do Dogecoin and Bcash leverage our translations, or this totally unsolved?
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Sjors[m]>
It shouldn't have to be rocket science to use translations from project X plus some of your own strings.
<Sjors[m]>
Maybe just a matter of some script to sync between two Transifex accounts?
<Sjors[m]>
We can't possibly be the only open source project with forks.
<laanwj>
transifex has a quite extensive API, i'm sure something like that is possible
<laanwj>
we used to use a script that transferred the entire translations and metadata from one resource to another for new major versions (which are also more or less a "fork")
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
aleggg has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aleggg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<laanwj>
i'm happy to help if someone is going to work on that, but i'm not taking the initiative
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
meshcollider has quit [Quit: :wave:]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Talkless has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
msc has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msc_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
msc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
BrandonOdiwuor has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]