16:00:02 <fjahr> #startmeeting 
16:00:02 <corebot> fjahr: Meeting started at 2026-03-05T16:00+0000
16:00:03 <corebot> fjahr: Current chairs: fjahr
16:00:04 <corebot> fjahr: Useful commands: #action #info #idea #link #topic #motion #vote #close #endmeeting
16:00:05 <corebot> fjahr: See also: https://hcoop-meetbot.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
16:00:06 <corebot> fjahr: Participants should now identify themselves with '#here' or with an alias like '#here FirstLast'
16:00:12 <cfields> hi
16:00:13 <sedited> hi
16:00:13 <dzxzgthree> hi hi hi
16:00:13 <fjahr> #bitcoin -core-dev Meeting: abubakarsadiq achow101 _aj_ ajonas b10c brunoerg cfields darosior dergoegge dzxzg eugenesiegel fanquake fjahr furszy gleb glozow hebasto hodlinator instagibbs janb84 jarolrod jonatack josibake kanzure kevkevin laanwj LarryRuane lightlike l0rinc luke-jr maflcko marcofleon maxedw Murch pinheadmz provoostenator ryanofsky sdaftuar S3RK stickies-v sipa sliv3r__ sr_gi tdb3 theStack TheCharlatan vasild
16:00:13 <fjahr> willcl-ark
16:00:14 <eugenesiegel> hi
16:00:19 <achow101> hi
16:00:20 <brunoerg> hi
16:00:21 <dergoegge> hi
16:00:23 <maxedw> hi
16:00:24 <andrewtoth_> hi
16:00:25 <lightlike> hi
16:00:25 <sr_gi> hi
16:00:27 <fjahr> There are no pre-proposed meeting topics this week. Any last minute ones to add?
16:00:37 <Murch[m]> hi
16:00:48 <kanzure> hi
16:00:49 <hebasto> hi
16:01:14 <janb84> hi
16:01:28 <fjahr> Ok, let's start with the WGs
16:01:32 <fjahr> #topic Fuzzing WG Update (dergoegge)
16:01:38 <hodlinator> hi
16:01:59 <dergoegge> I made a dashboard for Brink's fuzzing infrastructure: https://dergoegge.github.io/fuzzor-dashboard/
16:02:19 <darosior9> hi
16:02:25 <dergoegge> Please let me know if you have ideas on how that can be made more useful
16:02:28 <fjahr> very cool
16:02:29 <pinheadmz> Yo
16:02:36 <l0rinc> hi
16:02:44 <dergoegge> Already got some good feedback in the fuzzing wg (thanks!)
16:02:57 <dergoegge> Also wanted to bring up https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui-qml/pull/503
16:03:08 <dergoegge> It would be cool have something like this for the qt gui
16:03:36 <hebasto> qml will be a new gui soon
16:03:53 <dergoegge> If we're gonna keep maintaining it, it could be nice to increase our confidence with some fuzzing, which would be enabled by this approach
16:04:34 <willcl-ark> hi
16:04:49 <dergoegge> I'm not gonna work on it myself, but if someone is interested, I'd be willing to help with review or writing the fuzz tests
16:05:50 <fjahr> dergoegge: that's it?
16:06:34 <dergoegge> yes unless someone has something to add
16:06:36 <johnny9dev> Hi. I can throw some tokens to research it for Qt widgets. I've built this same thing before in another qml project
16:06:57 <dergoegge> Great! lmk how that goes!
16:07:05 <fjahr> #topic Kernel WG Update (sedited)
16:07:54 <sedited> don't have anything to share this week.
16:08:00 <fjahr> #topic Benchmarking WG Update (l0rinc, andrewtoth)
16:08:04 <l0rinc> nothing from me
16:08:56 <andrewtoth_> I opened #34692 based on feedback from last week's meeting and in #34641. Hopefully that is simple enough to get into v31. It would be a big UX improvement for our users. We can continue improving dbcaching in v32 afterwards.
16:08:58 <corebot> andrewtoth_: Error: That URL appears to have no HTML title within the first 32KB.
16:09:00 <corebot> andrewtoth_: Error: That URL appears to have no HTML title within the first 32KB.
16:09:38 <andrewtoth_> That's it from me
16:09:59 <fjahr> #topic Net Split WG Update (cfields)
16:10:14 <cfields> Still no update, focus has been elsewhere. Really hoping to get going this week. Thanks for your patience :)
16:11:29 <fjahr> Not seeing silent payments, but the k_max discussion is making progress afaict (bip change is merged I think) and the focus is again on the secp Pr that implements this.
16:11:39 <fjahr> Anything else to discuss?
16:12:15 <sipa> hi
16:12:20 <johnny9dev> I would like to get the qml project back onto the weekly topic list. I've spent the last 2 weeks working on it again and I am not have full momentum again.
16:12:34 <johnny9dev> I now have full momentum*
16:12:59 <fjahr> #topic QML GUI WG Update (johnny9dev)
16:13:01 <fjahr> :p
16:13:03 <johnny9dev> I have another contributor helping me as well who will like to update their progress too
16:13:09 <willcl-ark> nice!
16:13:35 <fjahr> johnny9dev: You don't have to ask for permission IMO, just move it up in the wiki page
16:14:11 <johnny9dev> My goal is feature parity and have setup the test automation frameworks and have done the decoupling from the original qt project. epcileafies has completed the features for peer disconnect/ban and completed a full e2e test for it using the gui test framework
16:15:18 <johnny9dev> the list of features has been added to the issues of the project.
16:15:52 <johnny9dev> thats all for this status i think
16:15:55 <fanquake> johnny9dev: one thing I'm a bit unclear on, is, are you planning to replace widgets with qml, or you want both to exist going forward (was wondering after the fuzz topic, because porting that to widgets seems like a bit of a waste, if it's just going to be replaced with qml anyways)?
16:16:06 <hebasto> yes, replace
16:16:41 <dergoegge> it's not a waste if we still ship qt for a while
16:18:26 <darosior> hebasto: so what's the plan? Replace regardless of IPC support? How does it fit with the topic you brought up a couple weeks ago?
16:19:22 <hebasto> the plan is to replace qt -> qml first, then consider switching to IPC
16:21:16 <fanquake> I guess anything IPC is blocked on actually implementing IPC for Windows, otherwise the GUI wont support Windows
16:21:18 <dzxzg> At localhost we've had some discussions recently about helping maintain/improve the qtwidgets gui, not opposed to qml replacing qtwidgets but I think while we are shipping qtwidgets we should be maintaining it and testing it
16:22:07 <johnny9dev> I think that makes sense and I will be helping with bitcoin-core/gui reviews as well.
16:22:20 <johnny9dev> eventhough my top priority will be gui-qml
16:22:34 <hodlinator> are there any plans to support tests comparing the drawn GUI to checked-in screenshots?
16:22:59 <darosior> hebasto: if i can push back a bit, what changed your opinion since you wrote https://gist.github.com/hebasto/478910dc16239d17c8bfdfd61a53a5dd ?
16:23:06 <darosior> And why do you think it will be different this time?
16:23:59 <fanquake> sidebar: asmap currently looking like 4 different results, for 4 different builders: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/asmap-data/issues/44
16:25:09 <sipa> and now there are 4 different resutls with 6 builders, better!
16:25:23 <hebasto> darosior: there is a plan to bring more GUI-needed dependencies into the release build process -- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29914#issuecomment-3921585808
16:25:44 <hebasto> ^ safely
16:26:43 <_aj_> i've found https://github.com/janb84/bitcoin-tui fun to mess around with, fwiw, in case people haven't seen it
16:26:47 <fanquake> hebasto: That seems a bit tangential though? That could be a discussion, or happen, regardless of anything QML related (i.e we could switch widget to a wayland backend), or if we wanted to ship static bins.
16:28:20 <fanquake> I posted that comment as a rough outline of what could happen, but I don't really know if it's a good idea, or what should happen. i.e, just because the guix build is split up, does that mean we ship/support/test apks for android? They seem like separate discussions, that could happen in any order.
16:28:21 <sedited> johnny9dev, gui-qml is still pulling in a few of the existing qt/*.h headers. Is the plan to consolidate these?
16:28:40 <hebasto> yes, it works for any extra dependencies, either widgets or QML
16:29:26 <johnny9dev> sedited: i did the work to remove all of those headers from the project and port over just what is needed
16:29:59 <fanquake> hebasto: yea, my point is that, figuring out how to do a release build, is downstream of (and doesn't have to be blocking) of actually deciding the larger picture
16:30:26 <johnny9dev> hodlinator: i added screenshot support to the qml test bridge but unsure what to do with it just yet. initially it will just be for capturing the state on failure
16:30:41 <fanquake> i.e doing the GUI over IPC, is unrelated to wether you build bitcoin-qt in a different guix container to bitcoind
16:32:55 <hebasto> combining many goal simultaneously, such use IPC and QML, won't be productive; switching to QML has a significant drawback, which is bringing more deps for static builds; now we have a _good_ plan to mitigate it
16:33:15 <hebasto> s/goal/goals/
16:34:40 <hodlinator> johnny9dev: cool, will look into it some more
16:35:04 <darosior> Agree re combining many goals, but i see the opposite. I hear some want to add features to qt widgets, others to QML, given the already low amount of dev resources on the GUI that seems.. surprising
16:36:33 <johnny9dev> the productivity tools that are available now require us all to reevaluate scope/resources
16:37:00 <johnny9dev> i did this last month and am shocked and very excited
16:37:09 <fjahr> I agree that it doesn't feel like all the Gui resources are pulling in the same direction. But maybe it's hard to see the bigger picture from the outside. Great to hear there is momentum definitely!
16:39:19 <fjahr> Well, sounds like johnny9dev will keep us updated and there may be a clearer picture emerging over time? Sounds like people would appreciate some better understanding of how the different work strings come together. Anything to add on this topic?
16:39:46 <fjahr> Anything else to discuss?
16:40:08 <achow101> 31.0 milestone
16:40:15 <fjahr> (asmap run is a nailbiter btw)
16:40:45 <sipa> team luisschwab, hodlinator, sedited, fjahr, sr-gi is in the lead
16:41:21 <achow101> (you can #topic that for me)
16:41:37 <fjahr> oh sorry
16:41:42 <fjahr> #topic 31.0 milestone
16:41:57 <achow101> Btanching is scheuled for the 10th, which is in 5 days
16:42:36 <achow101> There are still 8 open PRs in the milestone: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/74
16:42:47 <achow101> please review them
16:43:07 <sedited> also #34735 as an outstanding issue.
16:43:08 <corebot> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/34735 | Intermittent failure in rpc_gettxspendingprevout.py, line 98, assert_equal(node0.gettxspendingprevout([..]), [..]), JSONRPCException: No spending tx for the outpoint :0 in mempool, and txospenderindex is unavailable · Issue #34735 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
16:44:32 <achow101> that's all
16:45:11 <fjahr> Anything else?
16:46:01 <andrewtoth_> dergoegge: I see in your dashboard the only stopped harness is coins_view_overlay from Feb 22. I suppose that is https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/34645?
16:47:13 <dergoegge> yes, although there could be more reasons why something shows as stopped (besides a bug)
16:48:00 <fjahr> #endmeeting