14:00:12 <achow101> #startmeeting 14:00:12 <core-meetingbot> Meeting started Thu Oct 26 14:00:12 2023 UTC. The chair is achow101. Information about MeetBot at https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/ircmeetings. 14:00:12 <core-meetingbot> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 14:00:15 <achow101> #bitcoin -core-dev Meeting: achow101 _aj_ amiti ariard aureleoules b10c BlueMatt brunoerg cfields darosior dergoegge dongcarl fanquake fjahr furszy gleb glozow hebasto instagibbs jamesob jarolrod jonatack josibake kallewoof kanzure kouloumos kvaciral laanwj LarryRuane lightlike luke-jr MacroFake Murch phantomcircuit pinheadmz promag provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar S3RK stickies-v sipa theStack TheCharlatan vasild 14:00:24 <glozow> hi 14:00:27 <kanzure> hi 14:00:30 <pinheadmz> yo 14:00:38 <furszy> hi 14:00:38 <dergoegge> gday 14:00:39 <hebasto> hi 14:00:44 <josie> hi 14:00:46 <sipa> hi 14:00:52 <brunoerg> hi 14:00:57 <willcl-ark> hi 14:00:59 <stickies-v> hi 14:00:59 <sdaftuar> hello 14:01:03 <achow101> There are no pre-proposed meeting topics this week. Any last minute ones to add? 14:01:39 <achow101> #topic package relay updates (glozow) 14:01:40 <core-meetingbot> topic: package relay updates (glozow) 14:01:58 <glozow> Oh hi. #26711 is the blocker 14:02:01 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26711 | validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets by glozow ÷ Pull Request #26711 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:02:18 <glozow> In particular I am hoping to get some approach review from sdaftuar sipa _aj_ 14:02:24 <laanwj> hi 14:02:36 <sdaftuar> will review! 14:02:46 <glozow> sdaftuar: thanks! :D 14:03:13 <achow101> #topic silent payments updates (josibake) 14:03:13 <core-meetingbot> topic: silent payments updates (josibake) 14:03:30 <josie> hiya 14:04:02 <josie> currently working on updating the BIP based on some recent review, namely changing the hashing step and responding to some other comments 14:04:25 <josie> #25273 is ready for review 14:04:27 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25273 | wallet: Pass through transaction locktime and preset input sequences and scripts to CreateTransaction by achow101 ÷ Pull Request #25273 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:04:38 <achow101> how many prerequisite PRs are there? 14:04:41 <josie> as well as #28122 14:04:43 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28122 | Silent Payments: Implement BIP352 by josibake ÷ Pull Request #28122 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:05:17 <josie> 25273 is the main prerequisite , and then there is one more prerequisite PR based on 25273 14:05:29 <josie> #28560 14:05:30 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28560 | wallet, rpc: `FundTransaction` refactor by josibake ÷ Pull Request #28560 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:05:39 <achow101> are those required for 28122? 14:05:44 <josie> nope! 14:05:46 <_aj_> glozow: ping acknowledged :) 14:05:58 <josie> they are required for the sending and receiving PRs tho 14:06:44 <achow101> ok 14:07:01 <josie> as a heads up, ill be off the grid for november, but I'll ask someone to give updates in my absence and then I'll be back first week do december 14:07:28 <_aj_> josie: off the grid == not updating prs, or just missing meetings? 14:07:44 <josie> off the grid as in no internet access for a month, so both :) 14:08:01 <josie> but there are a few prs that are not owned by me, I think review can continue on those (ill make that clear in the tracking issue) 14:09:03 <achow101> #topic multiprocess updates (ryanofsky) 14:09:04 <core-meetingbot> topic: multiprocess updates (ryanofsky) 14:09:49 <achow101> possibly not here 14:09:54 <achow101> There's a tracking issue now: #28722 14:09:55 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28722 | Multiprocess tracking issue ÷ Issue #28722 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:10:18 <achow101> according to that, #28721 is the next to review 14:10:20 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28721 | multiprocess compatibility updates by ryanofsky ÷ Pull Request #28721 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:10:21 <stickies-v> wen checkboxes 14:11:09 <achow101> #topic Ad-hoc high priority for review 14:11:09 <core-meetingbot> topic: Ad-hoc high priority for review 14:11:14 <achow101> Anything to add or remove from https://github.com/orgs/bitcoin/projects/1/views/4 14:11:44 <furszy> could I get #28170? is a bit forgotten and I need it for the block tracker module. 14:11:46 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28170 | p2p: adaptive connections services flags by furszy ÷ Pull Request #28170 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:12:14 <achow101> furszy: added 14:12:17 <furszy> thx 14:13:01 <achow101> #topic 26.0rc1 14:13:01 <core-meetingbot> topic: 26.0rc1 14:13:21 <achow101> 26.0rc1 has been tagged. please test 14:13:39 <laanwj> yess ð 14:13:44 <josie> niice 14:13:49 <achow101> will try to get detached sigs up today, and the binaries up soon after 14:13:58 <achow101> once my guix builder stops giving me trouble 14:14:08 <achow101> Anything else to discuss today? 14:14:20 <josie> #28728 is a bug fix for v26, would be great to get another review or two on it 14:14:22 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28728 | wallet: [bugfix] Mark CNoDestination and PubKeyDestination constructor explicit by maflcko ÷ Pull Request #28728 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:14:39 <lightlike> in which form should assumeutxo be mentioned in the release notes? In the current draft, there are several notes relating to specifics (pruning, rpc) but nothing about the general status (unusable on mainnet yet), which seems not ideal to me. 14:15:07 <luke-jr> if it's not usable on mainnet, I'm not sure it belongs in rel notes yet? 14:15:13 <fanquake> The release notes (in general) still need lots of work, they can be hacked up in the wiki for hte next couple of rcs 14:15:26 <fanquake> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/26.0%E2%80%90Release%E2%80%90Notes%E2%80%90Draft 14:15:40 <sipa> i've added some mentions of BIP324 support (because while it's off by default, it can be enabled on mainnet) 14:16:46 <achow101> it may be useful to have a short section on assumeutxo so people can test it on testnet and signet? 14:16:55 <fanquake> Probably makes sense to bundle everything assumeutxo related into it's own section, and make it clear it's not production ready 14:17:08 <josie> luke-jr: we def want people to test the feature on signet, so putting it in the release notes seems like something we do want to do 14:17:24 <josie> fanquake: +1 14:17:26 <fanquake> interfaces may change, outset formats may change, etc etc 14:17:38 <luke-jr> josie: IMO release notes are for production, not testing/signet/etc 14:18:14 <fjahr> Would be good to mention it explicitly, I have met a few people at meetups that were confused about the status 14:19:09 <TheCharlatan> hi 14:19:34 <achow101> Any other topics? 14:20:56 <achow101> #endmeeting