< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #21694: build: Use XLIFF file to provide more context to Transifex translators (master...210415-xliff) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21694
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21694 | build: Use XLIFF file to provide more context to Transifex translators by hebasto · Pull Request #21694 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< ShapeShifter499>
so I have a question about the client. I'm on linux and I'm wondering does it matter what Berkeley Database Bitcoin is compiled against if I want to recover old wallets?
< wumpus>
december tends to be a really quiet month in bitcoin dev
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #21736: doc: Fix doxygen comment silent merge conflict in descriptor.cpp (master...2021-04-parameter-documentation) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21736
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #21238: A few descriptor improvements to prepare for Taproot support (master...202102_descriptor_prepare_taproot) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21238
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 4441c6f Pieter Wuille: Make DescriptorImpl support multiple subscripts
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master a917478 Pieter Wuille: refactor: move population of out.scripts from ExpandHelper to MakeScripts
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 84f3939 Pieter Wuille: Remove support for subdescriptors expanding to multiple scripts
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] sipsorcery opened pull request #21731: Update msvc build to use Qt5.12.10 binaries. (master...msvc_qt5.12.10) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21731
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21694 | build: Use XLIFF file to provide more context to Transifex translators by hebasto · Pull Request #21694 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< Arvidt>
I changed the hostname in my script from bitcoin.org to bitcoincore.org now it is working again. And the download speed is very fast now that's fine
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 13d27b4 Hennadii Stepanov: Merge bitcoin-core/gui#276: Elide long strings in their middle in the Peer...
< harding>
Arvidt: I don't see a 0.21.1 folder on bitcoin.org/bin/ ; are you sure you're seeing it? In any case, the preferred location to get the binaries is from https://bitcoincore.org/bin/
< Arvidt>
I have a Bitcoin binary download script that determines the latest version by parsing the output of 'wget -q -O - https://bitcoin.org/bin/' but there is no subfolder bitcoin-core-0.21.1/ in the output, while when I open https://bitcoin.org/bin/ with Firefox, the 0.21.1 subfolder is shown? Before I never had problems with my script. Also tried wget with --no-cache, but that did not help.
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] theStack opened pull request #21728: remove executable flag for src/net_processing.cpp (master...2021-remove-exec-flag-from-net_processing) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21728
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] JeremyRubin closed pull request #21721: [WIP][POC][DONOTMERGE] Flag Day ST Compatible Logic w/ Optional Mandatory Signalling (0.21...uasf) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21721
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] JeremyRubin opened pull request #21721: [WIP][POC][DONOTMERGE] Flag Day ST Compatible Logic w/ Optional Mandatory Signalling (0.21...uasf) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21721
2021-04-17
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #21719: refactor: Add and use EnsureConnman in rpc code (master...2104-netConnman) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21719
< bitcoin-git>
[gui] MarcoFalke merged pull request #277: Do not use QClipboard::Selection on Windows and macOS. (master...210410-clip) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/277
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] rebroad opened pull request #21713: Refactor ProcessNewBlock to reduce code duplication (master...RefactorProcessNewBlock) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21713
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] promag opened pull request #21712: qa: Test default include_mempool value of gettxout (master...2021-04-gettxout) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21712
< achow101>
Signature appears to be valid, but opening the .app results in "Bitcoin Core.app was blocked from use because it is not from an identified developer"
< Kiminuo>
Hi guys, a quick question: I have this PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21244 and it got one ACK. Now, should I just wait patiently until somebody else will review the PR? Or am I supposed to do something else to increase the chance of merging it? I'm not in hurry. I would just like to understand the review process better.
< provoostenator>
I suspect most of the Lnd / Btcd based lightning wallets also use p2p to discover bitcoin peers.
< harding>
amiti: re your mailing list post, I know that in 2015 BRD wallet used addr messages to find nodes but I don't think it sent any messages. Obviously that was eons ago in Bitcoin time and I don't know what it does now.
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #21697: DONOTMERGE test: drop cnetaddr link-local assert for all CIs except macOS 10.14 (master...cnetaddr-link-local-test-2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21697
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #21697: DONOTMERGE test: drop cnetaddr link-local assert for all CIs except macOS 10.14 (master...cnetaddr-link-local-test-2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21697
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #21696: DONOTMERGE test: drop cnetaddr link-local assert for macOS 10.14 to re-verify CI (master...cnetaddr-link-local-test-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21696
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #21695: Remove no longer used contrib/bitcoin-qt.pro from the repo (master...210415-pro) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21695
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #21694: build: Use XLIFF file to provide more context to Transifex translators (master...210415-xliff) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21694
< hebasto>
wumpus: I cannot see any way how the `contrib/bitcoin-qt.pro` is used in the translation process, neither in the main repo nor in https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-maintainer-tools. Besides it looks outdated and unmaintained. May I ask you to confirm/deny my assumption?
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #21691: test: Check that no versionbits are re-used (master...2104-testVersionbits) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21691
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #21690: test: use higher value in cnetaddr_basic link-local test (master...cnetaddr-link-local-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21690
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #21689: test: Remove intermittently failing and not very meaningful `BOOST_CHECK` in `cnetaddr_basic` (master...remove-intermittently-failing-and-largely-meaningless-ipv6-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21689
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] hebasto closed pull request #21680: test: Use called_from_lib to point uninstrumented libs to TSan (master...210414-tsan) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21680
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #21677: fuzz: Avoid use of low file descriptor ids (which may be in use) in FuzzedSock (master...avoid-open-fds-when-fuzzing) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21677
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 9712f75 MarcoFalke: Merge #21677: fuzz: Avoid use of low file descriptor ids (which may be in ...
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 6262182 practicalswift: Avoid use of low file descriptor ids (which may be in use) in FuzzedSock a...
< amiti>
kanzure: it was very odd, my email address wouldn't subscribe to bitcoin-dev, so per ReubenSomsen's suggestion we debugged by using bitcoin-discuss
< kanzure>
amiti: also you may have sent to bitcoin-discuss instead of bitcoin-dev
< da2ce7_>
wumpus: "<bitcoin-git> [gui] laanwj merged pull request #260: Handle exceptions instead of crash (master...210326-ex) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/260" the merge script seems to have a bug...
< jonasschnelli>
#proposedmeetingtopic short info/update on the "Bitcoin Core Code Signing Association" status.
< BlueMatt>
plus voskuil *normally* disagrees very strongly on bitcoin fork activation stuff, so him agreeing is a pretty good "did we even slightly screw this up" check