< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #19179: [WIP RFC DONOTMERGE] ci: Run ci configs on cirrus (master...2006-ciCirrus) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19179
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #19078: test: Add salvage test for wallet tool (master...2005-testWalletToolSalvage) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19078
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #19078: test: Add salvage test for wallet tool (master...2005-testWalletToolSalvage) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19078
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke reopened pull request #19078: test: Add salvage test for wallet tool (master...2005-testWalletToolSalvage) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19078
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #19078: test: Add salvage test for wallet tool (master...2005-testWalletToolSalvage) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19078
< MarcoFalke>
wumpus: sipa: Would it be possible to enable cirrus ci for testing purposed on the bitcoin/bitcoin repo?
< wumpus>
ofc. there will be a long stuggle to get it into bitcoin itself and hopefully a lot of people that will review the cryptography and code in detail
< jamesob>
I think I would not be wrong in characterizing most people at this meeting as "generally favorable towards schnorr -> bitcoin but unable to provide meaningful commentary on the specifics"
< sipa>
jamesob: i think the right question is whether it will be part of bitcoin *in this form*
< elichai2>
I think the big "political" question in terms of merging is if anyone believes that BIP340 doesn't have a good chance of landing in bitcoin core
< jamesob>
I'm curious if there's anyone here who *doesn't* think schnorr will or should eventually be a part of bitcoin
< elichai2>
I'd like to review the new keypair direction but I do hope that BIP340 will actually end up in bitcoin in the end so I think it's ok to move toward merging schnorr to libsecp
< wumpus>
there's a lot of expectations around it ending up in bitcoin eventually at least
< sipa>
we wouldn't just merge support for anything in libsecp256k1, being a subproject of bitcoin core
< sipa>
to me, it feels that there needs to be some confidence that this is the functionality that will eventually make it into bitcoin
< wumpus>
someone even did a presentation at a bitcoin coredev meetup about this once, I forgot who
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 39afe5b Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #19082: test: Moved the CScriptNum asserts into the unit test in scr...
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #19082: test: Moved the CScriptNum asserts into the unit test in script.py (master...issue24) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19082
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 7daffc6 Gillian Chu: [test] CScriptNum Decode Check as Unit Tests
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #19112: rpc: Remove special case for unknown service flags (master...2005-rpcServiceFlagsUnknown) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19112
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 365f108 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #19112: rpc: Remove special case for unknown service flags
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master fa1433a MarcoFalke: rpc: Remove special case for unknown service flags
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #19159: test: Make valgrind.supp work on aarch64 (master...2006-valgrindAarch64) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19159
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #18974: test: Check that invalid witness destinations can not be imported (master...2005-testInvalidWitnessDestination) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18974
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master bdedfcf MarcoFalke: Merge #18974: test: Check that invalid witness destinations can not be imp...
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master facede1 MarcoFalke: test: Check that invalid witness destinations can not be imported
< cncr04s>
can any one explain this "[00:47:45] cncr04s #bitcoin-core-dev Cannot change nickname while banned/quieted on channel" I have not spoken on this channel in weeks so...
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] dboures opened pull request #19134: test: Replace global wait_until with mininode.wait_until (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19134
< fanquake>
vasild: the 0.20 release is currently based on the 0.20. branch: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/0.20 (not master), so if the PR introduced the issue (17993) has. only been merged into master, then there is no issue with 0.20.
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] vasild opened pull request #19132: qt: lock cs_main, m_cached_tip_mutex in that order (master...lock_order_m_cached_tip_mutex) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19132
< Kiminuo>
Hi, can I make my PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18210 more attractive for review somehow? I have just rewritten the first post to articulate more clearly what the PR does.
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18288 | build: Add MemorySanitizer (MSan) in Travis to detect use of uninitialized memory by practicalswift · Pull Request #18288 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jonathanschoeller opened pull request #19131: refactor: Fix unreachable code in init arg checks (master...fix-Wunreachable-code-loop-increment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19131
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] ajtowns opened pull request #19130: doc: make it easier to work out size of bloom filter (master...202005-bloom-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19130
2020-05-31
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #18994: tests: Add fuzzing harnesses for functions in script/ (master...fuzzers-script-slash) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18994
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 43fb8f0 practicalswift: tests: Add fuzzing harness for functions in script/bitcoinconsensus.h
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 8de7271 practicalswift: tests: Fill fuzzing coverage gaps for functions in script/script.h, script...