19:02:03 <laanwj> #startmeeting 19:02:03 <core-meetingbot> Meeting started Thu Jun 3 19:02:03 2021 UTC. The chair is laanwj. Information about MeetBot at https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings. 19:02:03 <core-meetingbot> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 19:02:08 <jonasschnelli> hi 19:02:11 <hebasto> hi 19:02:16 <kvaciral[m]> hi 19:02:18 <michaelfolkson> hi 19:02:36 <sipa> hi 19:02:46 <laanwj> Kiminuo58: correct, one of my builds uses clang from git, I'm not sure the error happens with other versions I thought I'd note it because it completely blocks compilation 19:03:04 <laanwj> #bitcoin -core-dev Meeting: achow101 _aj_ amiti ariard BlueMatt cfields Chris_Stewart_5 darosior digi_james dongcarl elichai2 emilengler fanquake fjahr gleb glozow gmaxwell gwillen hebasto instagibbs jamesob jarolrod jb55 jeremyrubin jl2012 jnewbery jonasschnelli jonatack jtimon kallewoof kanzure kvaciral laanwj lightlike luke-jr maaku marcofalke meshcollider michagogo moneyball morcos 19:03:06 <laanwj> nehan NicolasDorier paveljanik petertodd phantomcircuit promag provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar sipa vasild 19:03:12 <achow101> hi 19:03:25 <jonatack> hi 19:03:35 <darosior> hi 19:03:41 <jarolrod> Hi 19:03:51 <laanwj> two proposed meeting topics for today: Bitcoin Code Signing Association Switzerland (jonasschnelli), Reviewing progress of fortnightly Core subsystem (P2P, wallet, GUI etc) meetings (michaelfolkson) 19:04:02 <laanwj> any last minute ideas for topics? 19:04:35 <laanwj> #topic High priority for review 19:04:35 <core-meetingbot> topic: High priority for review 19:05:09 <laanwj> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8 currently has 11 blockers, 0 bugfixes, 0 chasing concept ACK 19:05:16 <laanwj> anything to add/remove or that is ready for merge? 19:05:36 <dongcarl> Would like to add #21866, where we say farewell to global chainman 19:05:38 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21866 | [Bundle 7/7] validation: Farewell, global Chainstate! by dongcarl ÷ Pull Request #21866 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 19:05:44 <achow101> #22051 has 4 acks 19:05:46 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22051 | Basic Taproot derivation support for descriptors by sipa ÷ Pull Request #22051 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 19:06:05 <laanwj> we are getting close to the point where we need to prioritize what we still want to make into 0.22 19:06:23 <provoostenator> hi 19:06:25 <jonatack> pushed a (close-to-final?) big update to #21261, hoping it can be tagged/merged for v0.22 19:06:28 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21261 | p2p: update inbound eviction protection for multiple networks, add I2P peers by jonatack ÷ Pull Request #21261 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 19:06:41 <laanwj> feature freeze is the 15th according to #20851 19:06:42 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20851 | Release schedule for 22.0 ÷ Issue #20851 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 19:06:49 <laanwj> which is in less than two weeks 19:07:45 <jonatack> (been working on it behind the scenes these past weeks with helpful offline review feedback from vasild) 19:08:34 <laanwj> achow101: yes, that one seems ready for merge 19:08:45 <laanwj> dongcarl: added 19:08:59 <laanwj> jonatack: tagged for 22.0 19:09:16 <laanwj> anything else for high prio? 19:10:11 <laanwj> #topic Bitcoin Code Signing Association Switzerland (jonasschnelli) 19:10:11 <core-meetingbot> topic: Bitcoin Code Signing Association Switzerland (jonasschnelli) 19:10:24 <jonasschnelli> The swiss association is now officially registered 19:10:31 <laanwj> congrats! 19:10:31 <jonasschnelli> Which means we can get code signing certificates again 19:10:49 <laanwj> also for macosx? 19:10:51 <jonasschnelli> It comes with some maintenance costs as we needed a domicile... 19:11:08 <jonasschnelli> macOS should be no problem 19:11:51 <jonasschnelli> (also the current macOS cert is still valid for a few months) 19:12:10 <laanwj> i guess we could use the coredev funds for that 19:12:17 <jonasschnelli> the question is, do we want to keep the swiss association or do we want to focus on the US LLC? 19:12:26 <jonasschnelli> agree with the coredev funds 19:12:39 <provoostenator> Maybe keep them both for a while? 19:12:53 <jonasschnelli> Yes. That's also what I thought provoostenator 19:12:53 <laanwj> yeah some redundancy couldn't hurt 19:12:55 <achow101> I think it makes sense to keep both as a backup 19:13:18 <jonasschnelli> okay... lets keep it and see when we might want to use it 19:13:24 <provoostenator> Can we have certificates from both at the same time too? (but only use one) 19:14:14 <achow101> I was also thinking we could alternate every year, so after say 9 months, try to get a cert using the other org. that would give us 3 months to work out any issues with getting a cert issued 19:15:42 <laanwj> that sounds sensible to me 19:16:52 <jonasschnelli> agree 19:17:06 <laanwj> #topic Reviewing progress of fortnightly Core subsystem meetings (michaelfolkson) 19:17:06 <core-meetingbot> topic: Reviewing progress of fortnightly Core subsystem meetings (michaelfolkson) 19:17:42 <michaelfolkson> So with the Libera transition I thought it would be a good point to discuss how the subsystem meetings are going, how they could be improved etc 19:18:14 <michaelfolkson> The P2P ones started with a really good format https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/P2P-IRC-meetings 19:18:26 <michaelfolkson> But they've kind of run out of steam in recent weeks 19:18:50 <michaelfolkson> The wallet one appears to struggle with attendance a lot of the time (from what I've seen) 19:19:18 <michaelfolkson> I like the idea of them, I personally would like to hear what people are working on but that's just me, sample size of 1 19:19:51 <michaelfolkson> Perhaps 2 weeks is too regular, come round too often. Do you think attendance would be better if they were monthly? 19:20:12 <michaelfolkson> I think there are GUI meetings on Jitsi or at least there were 19:20:13 <provoostenator> I don't often show up for wallet meetings, but when I do, I find them useful. 19:20:31 <laanwj> wouldn't this be better to discuss in those meetings themselves, with the people attending them? 19:20:36 <provoostenator> (or at least quick) 19:20:43 <achow101> I don't think having them more or less frequently would make that much of a difference 19:20:52 <achow101> it isn't that much effort to have a short meeting with little discussion 19:20:54 <michaelfolkson> laanwj: I guess but I thought it might be useful to compare notes 19:21:04 <jonatack> provoostenator: achow101: agree 19:21:09 <achow101> but it's still useful to have the meetings for when there are things to discuss 19:21:24 <michaelfolkson> achow101: I think the expectation that not many will attend means that other people don't bother 19:21:32 <provoostenator> I don't like the time of day, but timezones are just what they are: annoying. 19:21:34 <jarolrod> The âÂÂGUIâ meetings on jitsi are not really core dev related 19:21:58 <jarolrod> I think itâÂÂs fair to say there are no GUI meetings 19:22:02 <achow101> michaelfolkson: I don't think that's necessarily true 19:22:15 <jonatack> the p2p ones are really late now for CET people, so e.g. vasild and i don't attend, but i get value from reading the meeting log the next day 19:22:33 <michaelfolkson> But ok I'll bring up in the subsystem meetings and see how we can encourage attendance, participation 19:22:54 <achow101> I think that frequently, it appears that few people are attending because no one speaks. but when there is actually something to discuss, there are many more people speaking than you may think 19:22:58 <michaelfolkson> As I said the P2P ones started really strongly but have lost steam in recent weeks 19:23:23 <achow101> I suspect many people just lurk with IRC open during the meetings 19:23:25 <michaelfolkson> With P2P contributors were posting on the dev wiki what they were working on but I don't think many people are bothering anymore 19:23:48 <michaelfolkson> I like the idea but you can't force people to do it 19:23:54 <laanwj> the libera migration was kind of brutal, maybe not everyone caught up yet 19:24:10 <michaelfolkson> Indeed, this week appears quiet with Libera and Miami 19:24:19 <michaelfolkson> But I think the trend started before then 19:24:22 <laanwj> in any case it's going to fluctuate 19:24:41 <michaelfolkson> Ok thanks, I will bring up in the individual subsystem meetings. 19:24:51 <provoostenator> Even with low attendance the logs can be useful for later, so you can even just have a monologue :-) 19:24:52 <jonatack> the wallet meetings are cool as-is IMO :) 19:25:08 <michaelfolkson> Good to know the feedback, thanks 19:25:15 <laanwj> anecdotally i don't think doing the meeting less often results in higher attendance, if anything it makes people forget about it more :) 19:25:33 <jonatack> yup 19:25:54 <michaelfolkson> Ok leaving as is seems the preference 19:26:16 <laanwj> i think that concludes today's meeting 19:26:30 <laanwj> thanks everyone who still made it :) 19:26:31 <laanwj> #endmeeting