14:00:24 <achow101> #startmeeting 14:00:26 <jonatack> hi 14:00:27 <TheCharlatan> hi 14:00:29 <pinheadmz> hi 14:00:34 <hebasto> hi 14:00:34 <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 sr_gi theStack TheCharlatan vasild 14:00:36 <willcl-ark> hi 14:00:39 <vasild> hi 14:00:40 <cfields> hi 14:00:40 <brunoerg> hi 14:00:40 <furszy> hi 14:00:46 <dergoegge> hi 14:00:57 <achow101> There is one preproposed meeting topic this week. Any last minute ones to add to the list? 14:01:07 <sr_gi[m]> hi 14:01:07 <b10c> hi 14:01:20 <Murch[m]> hi 14:01:36 <achow101> #topic package relay updates (glozow) 14:01:47 <glozow> #30000 was merged (yay!). The priority PR is still #28984. On the p2p side, I opened #30110 as the next step. #30111 splits out the first 4 commits which are concerned with thread safety and should be reviewed very carefully. The rest of #30110 consists of more mechanical refactoring + tests. 14:01:50 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30000 | p2p: index TxOrphanage by wtxid, allow entries with same txid by glozow ÷ Pull Request #30000 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:01:53 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28984 | Cluster size 2 package rbf by instagibbs ÷ Pull Request #28984 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:01:53 <kanzure> hi 14:01:54 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30110 | refactor: TxDownloadManager by glozow ÷ Pull Request #30110 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:01:55 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30111 | locks: introduce mutex for tx download, flush rejection filters on UpdatedBlockTip by glozow ÷ Pull Request #30111 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:01:56 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30110 | refactor: TxDownloadManager by glozow ÷ Pull Request #30110 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:02:14 <josie> hi 14:02:14 <sipa> hi 14:02:18 <glozow> And #28984 has #20072 as the first few refactoring commits 14:02:19 <gmaxwell> hi 14:02:20 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28984 | Cluster size 2 package rbf by instagibbs ÷ Pull Request #28984 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:02:26 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20072 | ci: Build Arm64 on Travis without functional tests by fjahr ÷ Pull Request #20072 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:02:27 <glozow> sorry I meant #30072 14:02:29 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30072 | refactor prep for package rbf by instagibbs ÷ Pull Request #30072 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:02:54 <achow101> so #30072 should go first? 14:02:56 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30072 | refactor prep for package rbf by instagibbs ÷ Pull Request #30072 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:02:58 <_aj_> hi 14:03:03 <glozow> Yeah it's the first few commits of package RBF 14:04:00 <glozow> Oh also, I figured I'd ping on #29873 which seems to have some conceptual support, would be nice to get that in so we can do #29496 14:04:01 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29873 | policy: restrict all TRUC (v3) transactions to 25KvB by glozow ÷ Pull Request #29873 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:04:02 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29496 | policy: bump TX_MAX_STANDARD_VERSION to 3 by glozow ÷ Pull Request #29496 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:04:12 <glozow> (also feel free to bikeshed on the 25k number) 14:04:30 <glozow> That's all from me. 14:04:36 <achow101> #topic cluster mempool updates (sdaftuar) 14:05:07 <sdaftuar> hi -- so i think last week i mentioned i had been working on an esoteric issue. unfortunately i've still been working on it for the past week so i can just quickly update what that is 14:05:30 <sdaftuar> one thing that sipa and i have been discussing is whether we cna come up with some sort of "quality metric" for linearizations. there are a couple of reasons you might want this: 14:05:42 <sdaftuar> a) having tests to ensure that our code does what we expect (eg regression tests so we don't break things in the future) 14:05:50 <sdaftuar> b) having an understanding of what guarantees we provide to users 14:06:45 <sdaftuar> so as a natural place to start, we can think about guarantees ancestor feerate based mining provides. however, it turns out that it seems to guarantee surprisingly little, and coming up with general properties that should hold up is quite hard 14:07:05 <sdaftuar> anyway, i don't have a good answer to this question yet but will continue to think about it, and probably set my sights lower for what tests we can include 14:07:31 <sdaftuar> that's it from me 14:07:33 <stickies-v> hi 14:08:03 <sipa> i'll probably open a PR today with low-level cluster linearization code 14:08:16 <achow101> yay 14:08:19 <sdaftuar> \o/ 14:08:28 <sdaftuar> that would immediately become the PR to review please :) 14:08:58 <achow101> #topic legacy wallet removal updates (achow101) 14:09:47 <achow101> #26606 has been getting plenty of review and seems to be close. there's a few residual comments that need to be addressed, but those should be fairly trivial 14:09:55 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26606 | wallet: Implement independent BDB parser by achow101 ÷ Pull Request #26606 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:10:33 <achow101> once again, if you have legacy wallets, testing them with the parser would be appreciated 14:10:54 <achow101> #topic Ad-hoc high priority for review 14:11:00 <achow101> Anything to add or remove from https://github.com/orgs/bitcoin/projects/1/views/4 14:11:15 <glozow> Not sure if this should be in the project board, but I would appreciate some review on #29899. 14:11:17 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29899 | [26.x] archive 26.1 release notes + backports by glozow ÷ Pull Request #29899 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:11:39 <achow101> glozow: added 14:11:43 <glozow> thanks! 14:12:40 <sr_gi[m]> I've recently opened https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30116. Given Erlay was listed in high review prio, I guess that should also go there 14:13:23 <achow101> sr_gi[m]: that board is for whatever you personally feel should be slightly prioritized 14:13:40 <vasild> maflcko: would be nice if you remove your stale NACK from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29421#issuecomment-1985212820 14:13:54 <achow101> sr_gi[m]: should #28765 be closed? 14:13:57 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28765 | p2p: Fill reconciliation sets (Erlay) by naumenkogs ÷ Pull Request #28765 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:14:40 <sipa> i think we don't want to two ~identical PRs open simultaneously 14:14:45 <sr_gi[m]> I think so. I talked to Gleb and looks like he had no time to work on it atm, and he was happy that I picked it up 14:14:46 <Chris_Stewart_5> hi 14:15:20 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 closed pull request #28765: p2p: Fill reconciliation sets (Erlay) (master...2023-11-erlay2.1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28765 14:15:27 <achow101> closed, and added #30116 to the board 14:15:28 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30116 | p2p: Fill reconciliation sets (Erlay) attempt 2 by sr-gi ÷ Pull Request #30116 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub 14:15:32 <abubakarsadiq> hi 14:15:47 <sr_gi[m]> ty 14:16:26 <achow101> #topic moderators (achow101) 14:17:09 <achow101> The proposed moderation guidelines have been public for a couple weeks now, and there's been a bit of feedback. I think it's at the point that we can move forward with putting them into effect and electing/appointing/volunteering some moderators 14:17:45 <achow101> There is a meta repo where the guidelines will live, as well as any meta discussion: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/meta. the discussion about the guidelines has taken place there as well. 14:18:21 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky pushed 10 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/dd42a5ddea6a...75118a608fc2 14:18:21 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4202c17 Matthew Zipkin: test: refactor interface_rpc.py 14:18:22 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 09416f9 Matthew Zipkin: test: cover JSONRPC 2.0 requests, batches, and notifications 14:18:22 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master df6e375 Matthew Zipkin: rpc: Avoid copies in JSONRPCReplyObj() 14:18:29 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky merged pull request #27101: Support JSON-RPC 2.0 when requested by client (master...jsonrpc-2.0) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27101 14:18:39 <achow101> 2 weeks ago, willcl-ark and pinheadmz volunteered to be moderators, and I think there was general agreement for them. I think we can start with them, if there are no objections? 14:18:57 <darosior> hi 14:19:00 <darosior> +1 for both 14:19:03 <cfields> +1 14:19:04 <hebasto> ACK on willcl-ark and pinheadmz 14:19:06 <brunoerg> +1 14:19:06 <abubakarsadiq> +1 14:19:11 <sipa> +1 14:19:11 <ajonas> +1 14:19:15 <dergoegge> +1 14:19:20 <b10c> +2 14:19:25 <josie> +1 14:19:41 <josie> b10c: lol 14:19:46 <pinheadmz> blushing 14:19:59 <pinheadmz> json 2.0 merged too plenty of free time now 14:20:02 <vasild> +1 14:20:03 <achow101> as always, we can make changes if necessary, this isn't something that's set in stone 14:20:08 <sr_gi[m]> ACK on both 14:21:21 <jonatack> guidelines suggestion: "pull requests will be *aggressively* moderated" -> s/aggressively/actively/ 14:21:26 <achow101> Any other topics to discuss? 14:21:54 <jonatack> +1 on willcl-ark and pinheadmz 14:23:30 <achow101> #endmeeting