<achow101>
There are 2 preproposed meeting topics this week. Any last minute ones to add?
<marcofleon>
hi
<achow101>
#topic Erlay WG Update (sr_gi, gleb, marcofleon)
<hebasto>
hi
<sr_gi[m]>
No meaningful update on my end, still reworking some parts of the simulator to run the last batch of planned experiments
<achow101>
#topic Kernel WG Update (TheCharlatan)
<cfields>
hi
<marcofleon>
quick update from me is that Gleb rebased the full implementation, so I'm working with that and cleaning it up a bit and writing/improving fuzz tests for erlay
<lightlike>
hi
<theStack>
hi
<Murch[m]>
hi
<TheCharlatan>
we've been spending some time on API ergonomics, but no big chances to report back on yet.
<TheCharlatan>
*changes :P
<TheCharlatan>
that's all
<achow101>
#topic Cluster Mempool WG Update (sdaftuar, sipa)
<sipa>
getting some reviews on #31363, addressing it
<achow101>
I finally got around to writing test vectors for BIP 373. The test vectors are added to the bip in bips#1764, and I've updated #31247 with them as well.
<achow101>
#31622 has been getting lots of review as well
<corebot>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31622 | psbt: add non-default sighash types to PSBTs and unify sighash type match checking by achow101 · Pull Request #31622 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<cfields>
Is 28676 in a state to be tested/reviewed some? Or is that considered to be in major flux?
zeropoint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sipa>
cfields: i'd wait for the next push
<cfields>
👍
<achow101>
#topic Legacy Wallet Removal WG Update (achow101)
<Sjors[m]>
hi
<achow101>
#31495 has been getting lots of review. It seems close to being rfm.
<corebot>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31495 | wallet: Utilize IsMine() and CanProvide() in migration to cover edge cases by achow101 · Pull Request #31495 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<achow101>
#31250 is also ready to be reviewed, and can be done in parallel to #31495. It disables and disallows legacy wallets but does not delete the code yet, so it would be nice to get this in for 29.0.
<corebot>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31495 | wallet: Utilize IsMine() and CanProvide() in migration to cover edge cases by achow101 · Pull Request #31495 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<achow101>
#topic orphan resolution WG Update (glozow)
<glozow>
I opened #31829 for improving the orphanage dos limits, gunning for v29. It's getting good review and tests (thank you!).
<corebot>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31829 | p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds and increase -maxorphantxs by glozow · Pull Request #31829 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<glozow>
Hoping for 1-2 more reviewers, I think it's important to get these protections in
<glozow>
That's all from me
<achow101>
#topic Stratum v2 WG Update (sjors)
<Sjors[m]>
#31283 and #31785 are hopefully the last remaining interface changes that are needed for the Template Provider. They're getting good review, but can use extra eyes to get them over the finish line.
<corebot>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31785 | Have createNewBlock() wait for tip, make rpc handle shutdown during long poll and wait methods by Sjors · Pull Request #31785 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<Sjors[m]>
On the multiprocess front, #31741 is the place to be I think.
<Sjors[m]>
(or you could try a guix build and see if you get the same hashes)
<Sjors[m]>
That's all from my end.
<achow101>
#topic QML GUI Working Group (jarolrod)
<jarolrod>
I announce it before here on IRC, but wanted to do it in the meeting for visibility
<achow101>
jarolrod: would you like to be added to the list for weekly updates?
<jarolrod>
^ yes
<jarolrod>
I want to announce the creation of a working group for the QML GUI to:
<jarolrod>
- Broadcast status updates to core devs who are interested in the progress of the work.
<jarolrod>
- Serve as a place to discuss adjacent work like, QT6 migration, an effective wallet interface for the GUI, what role the QML GUI can play within the multiprocess work, and a redesign for bitcoincore.org (https://youtu.be/e2m1iEWJplM)
<jarolrod>
- Serve as a place where core devs can hear from and interface with the Bitcoin Design Community, who’s been at the heart of a lot of the work
<jarolrod>
and again, if you’d like to be added to the group please DM me here on IRC, over Signal, Twitter, TikTok, wherever you can find me. I have a preference for TikTok reaction videos please
<achow101>
lol
<jarolrod>
also johnny9dev584508 is here, although he really needs to update his username
<achow101>
do you have an initial update to give?
<jarolrod>
no initial update this week, for the next one yes
<cfields>
jarolrod: thanks for updating us here, that'll be really useful.
<achow101>
ok
<jarolrod>
🫂
<glozow>
thanks jarolrod
<achow101>
#topic Kill-Shill-Merge for v29.0 Milestone, on a jitsi call right after the IRC meeting (glozow)
<glozow>
We are 1 week away from feature freeze, 3 weeks from branch-off. We have 28 open PRs on the milestone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/69. It seems realistic, but I think we should try to coordinate review a litle bit.
<achow101>
I guess we can talk 29.0 release priorities in this topic as well.
dzxzg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<glozow>
I think the most efficient way to do this is get on a jitsi, I'll share screen, we go through the PRs + find volunteers to review them, similar to our kill-shill-merge sessions. This doesn't guarantee we'll get them all done but I don't want to just wait around hoping that review will come.
<glozow>
Yeah
<Sjors[m]>
By "kill" you just mean dropping off of the milestone?
<glozow>
First, anything to add to the milestone?
<lightlike>
looks like 90% build system PRs
<glozow>
Sjors: yes
<fanquake>
I don't think there's anything mergable, maybe a couple that can be dropped, but most of what's on there really need to go in
<fanquake>
Lots of fixes for things post-cmake etc
<glozow>
fanquake: right
<fanquake>
coverage still needs to be overhauled from gcc to llvm, it'd be good to get that sorted
<fanquake>
I guess some wallet bugs now too, not sure if they are blockers
<cfields>
ok, so maybe more about getting people to commit to priority review?
<fanquake>
+ the newest orpahange changes
<hebasto>
it will be useful if someone confirms llvm-based coverage correctness first
<achow101>
glozow: immediately after the meeting ends or at the hour when it nominally ends?
<darosior>
Would just basic testing of the build system PRs be helpful? I don't think i'm really able to do more than that.
<glozow>
achow101: immediately after the meeting ends, no reason to delay imo
<darosior>
hebasto: ok i can do that, i've had my manual setup for a while.
<cfields>
kernel wg will shift to jitsi today instead 🫡
<glozow>
I hope folks are available? I'll set up a call link rn
<hebasto>
darosior: thanks
<sipa>
happy to join
<achow101>
me too
<glozow>
everyone who's here please do join
<glozow>
authors of milestone PRs list fanquake glozow darosior hebasto achow101 maflcko lightlike jimhashhq stickies-v theuni sipa
<willcl-ark>
hi
<stickies-v>
wait what i don't even have a PR open
<stickies-v>
(but yes i'm joining)
<achow101>
Any other topics to discuss right now
<sipa>
stickies-v: better open one quickly!
<achow101>
stickies-v: you have an issue open though
<Sjors[m]>
By the way, Github has a new "feature" where pushes are processed with a delay: "Recent push is still being processed, and will show up in a bit"
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #31765: cmake: Install man pages for configured targets only (master...250130-man-inst) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31765
<Murch[m]>
jarolrod: What communication channel does the GUI working group use?
<jarolrod>
Murch[m]: we're on signal!
<jarolrod>
there's also always been the #bitcoin-core-app channel on the design discord, but this signal working group is more focused than that channel
dzxzg has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
dzxzg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
bugs_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest44 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
tapscript has quit [Quit: Client closed]
Guest44 has quit [Quit: Guest44]
johnny9dev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Murch[m]>
jarolrod: I’ll DM you
achow101 has quit [Quit: Bye]
achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
achow101 has quit [Client Quit]
achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
sliv3r__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
corebot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
corebot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
corebot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<corebot>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31590 | descriptors: Try pubkeys of both parities when retrieving the private keys for an xonly pubkey in a descriptor by achow101 · Pull Request #31590 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
zeropoint has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]
zeropoint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<darosior>
Following the topic from a couple weeks ago regarding long term goals and scope of the project i have laid down my thoughts on the topic. Here is the last post of a series with a concrete suggestion on how to move forward to address these issues, following a couple more abstract posts about prioritisation and scope.
<darosior>
I wanted to share it here in view of the upcoming CoreDev. I hope others will also find the time to reflect on this and we can have a more productive discussion than the regular "muh just delete GUI/wallet" or "just keep on the untenable situation" we've had in past editions.
Cory98 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
Cory98 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Talkless has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
jespada has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
sliv3r__ has quit [Quit: Client closed]
<achow101>
For #31826, any hints on building for android? IIRC we ripped all that stuff out, so idk how those guys are testing it.
<corebot>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31826 | random: Check `GetRNDRRS` is supported in `InitHardwareRand` to avoid infinite loop by eval-exec · Pull Request #31826 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
sliv3r__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sipa>
achow101: no clue
<laanwj>
i don't think anyone does native android builds, maybe they build it inside termux?
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] TheCharlatan opened pull request #31860: init: Take lock on blocks directory in BlockManager ctor (master...blockmanLock) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31860
<hebasto>
isn't android build broken since moving to c++20?
<laanwj>
oh they do mention "Build with: Android NDK 25.1.8937393 & 27.2.12479018" no clue in that case
<hebasto>
laanwj: it seems I missed the context; who are "they"?
jonatack has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
MyNetAz has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
longtimelookfirs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
MyNetAz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<achow101>
I think they're not building bitcoin core directly, but have a library that's using our code
longtimelookfirs has quit [K-Lined]
dzxzg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<laanwj>
that seems likely
<laanwj>
sigh, ideally we wouldn't have to work around chip errata in bitcoin core, the kernel could disable the rng cpu capability on the affected SoCs, or implement some other workaround
nanotube has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<laanwj>
but with the level of brokenness of phone hardware and dysfunctional software updating practices that's probably too much to expect