1 2011-09-12 00:00:04 <luke-jr> (which has 0.3.20.2 stable)
  2 2011-09-12 00:00:09 <BlueMatt> wtf???
  3 2011-09-12 00:00:21 <BlueMatt> there are soooo many more fixes on top of that version
  4 2011-09-12 00:00:28 <SomeoneWeird> 0.o
  5 2011-09-12 00:00:33 <luke-jr> but it's the last version before deadlocks
  6 2011-09-12 00:00:36 <luke-jr> I have hopes for 0.4 ;)
  7 2011-09-12 00:00:52 <SomeoneWeird> just full on kill .23 in the .4 update
  8 2011-09-12 00:01:10 <luke-jr> SomeoneWeird: after 0.4 has been tested for a while, that's my next rebase
  9 2011-09-12 00:01:44 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I can easily strip that.
 10 2011-09-12 00:01:50 <luke-jr> it'd also be utterly stupid
 11 2011-09-12 00:01:50 <SomeoneWeird> luke-jr, i mean exactly what BlueMatt just said ^^ :)
 12 2011-09-12 00:01:52 <BlueMatt> you can, but gentoo wont
 13 2011-09-12 00:01:57 <luke-jr> will*
 14 2011-09-12 00:02:11 <SomeoneWeird> lol
 15 2011-09-12 00:02:14 <SomeoneWeird> /fail
 16 2011-09-12 00:02:30 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: this bleeding-edge-required is terrible practice
 17 2011-09-12 00:02:33 <BlueMatt> wait, are the gentoo builds in the official package manager?
 18 2011-09-12 00:02:39 <luke-jr> ESPECIALLY for financial software
 19 2011-09-12 00:02:57 <Joric> just add 0.23 crasher to 0.4
 20 2011-09-12 00:03:01 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: you don't seem to understand how Gentoo works ;)
 21 2011-09-12 00:03:12 <BlueMatt> I dont, enlighten me
 22 2011-09-12 00:03:14 <luke-jr> Joric: as soon as I identify the problem, I'm patching it
 23 2011-09-12 00:03:44 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: everything is automatically built from source; besides core stuff, the ebuilds (instructions to build it) are stored in overlays
 24 2011-09-12 00:04:02 <BlueMatt> I know that, I was asking if your ebuilds are in the official ebuild manager
 25 2011-09-12 00:04:19 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: don't know what your obsession with "official" is
 26 2011-09-12 00:04:54 <Joric> responsibility mb?
 27 2011-09-12 00:04:58 <BlueMatt> if its unofficial, of course you can patch that out and patch bitcoin however you want, if its the officially shipped list of ebuilds, you really cant
 28 2011-09-12 00:05:07 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: wrong
 29 2011-09-12 00:05:17 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: Gentoo patches lots of things
 30 2011-09-12 00:05:18 <luke-jr> like KDE
 31 2011-09-12 00:05:20 <luke-jr> or Linux
 32 2011-09-12 00:05:27 <luke-jr> Bitcoind is no exception
 33 2011-09-12 00:05:31 <BlueMatt> or at least Id ask, who the hell let luke-jr maintin officially released ebuilds
 34 2011-09-12 00:05:40 <luke-jr> especially when the bitcoind maintainers refuse to follow standard software practices
 35 2011-09-12 00:05:48 <BlueMatt> are the eligius patches in your ebuilds?
 36 2011-09-12 00:05:54 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: optional
 37 2011-09-12 00:05:59 <BlueMatt> ...
 38 2011-09-12 00:06:23 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: you have an authority complex.
 39 2011-09-12 00:06:24 <BlueMatt> oh good, there are no official packages for bitcoin
 40 2011-09-12 00:06:42 <BlueMatt> so I dont have to care wtf luke-jr breaks in bitcoin ebuilds
 41 2011-09-12 00:06:45 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 4a2652e5eb6b r52 /src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/TempLogger.java: - fix: TempLogger not appending newline
 42 2011-09-12 00:06:51 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: nothing is broken
 43 2011-09-12 00:07:15 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I would be glad if bitcoind maintainers ever move to a sane release strategy
 44 2011-09-12 00:07:23 <BlueMatt> like?
 45 2011-09-12 00:07:31 <luke-jr> like one that involves a stable branch
 46 2011-09-12 00:07:47 <BlueMatt> you mean like a update branch and unstable?
 47 2011-09-12 00:07:58 <luke-jr> like one that only ever gets bugfixes
 48 2011-09-12 00:08:03 <luke-jr> and remains supported for 3 years
 49 2011-09-12 00:08:10 <BlueMatt> I dont disagree but...meh
 50 2011-09-12 00:08:19 <BlueMatt> both ways have big disadvantages and advantages...
 51 2011-09-12 00:08:19 <Joric> i remember that epic patch of nvidia driver https://github.com/MrMEEE/bumblebee/commit/a047be85247755cdbe0acce6
 52 2011-09-12 00:08:27 <Joric> not sure it was official
 53 2011-09-12 00:08:31 <BlueMatt> like a /ton/ of wasted effort
 54 2011-09-12 00:08:35 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: until then, distros will always have to do the patching themselves
 55 2011-09-12 00:08:44 <BlueMatt> Joric: please stfu until you are remotely sort of on-topic
 56 2011-09-12 00:08:52 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: maintaining a stable branch takes almost no effort, if development is done correctly.
 57 2011-09-12 00:09:18 <SomeoneWeird> define: correctly
 58 2011-09-12 00:09:24 <luke-jr> SomeoneWeird: daggy fixes
 59 2011-09-12 00:09:26 <BlueMatt> the kernel style of rcs for weeks is great for a project with a ton of testing
 60 2011-09-12 00:09:58 <BlueMatt> but Im not sure a project without many contributors could work well under a stable and branch release method
 61 2011-09-12 00:10:02 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: even with all that testing, Linux still regularly does final releases with major regressions
 62 2011-09-12 00:10:09 <SomeoneWeird> meh
 63 2011-09-12 00:10:10 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: and distros continue to maintain stable branches
 64 2011-09-12 00:10:31 <luke-jr> stable/development branching takes minimal effort, and doesn't require excessive testing
 65 2011-09-12 00:10:43 <luke-jr> excessive testing is needed *because* of the *lack* of a stable branch
 66 2011-09-12 00:10:45 <BlueMatt> takes more effort than you think with bitcoin...
 67 2011-09-12 00:11:08 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: only because/if most bitcoin bugfixes are done wrong
 68 2011-09-12 00:11:12 <BlueMatt> the lack of well-defined structures and general mess of code makes merging particularly hard
 69 2011-09-12 00:11:30 <luke-jr> well, admittedly the major refactoring lately would make it more difficult
 70 2011-09-12 00:11:37 <luke-jr> hopefully when that's done, it will be easier
 71 2011-09-12 00:11:44 <BlueMatt> hopefully more of that will happen
 72 2011-09-12 00:12:09 <luke-jr> maybe 0.5 will be sanitized enough to be supported when 0.6 is underway
 73 2011-09-12 00:12:17 <BlueMatt> which means we can continue as it currently is until we are done and have a sanitized bitcoin
 74 2011-09-12 00:12:33 <luke-jr> sure
 75 2011-09-12 00:12:36 <BlueMatt> well Id do the grunt work if someone who could design libs good would do the lib part to make gavin happy
 76 2011-09-12 00:12:54 <luke-jr> BC Consultancy is doing a lib from scratch fwiw
 77 2011-09-12 00:12:55 <BlueMatt> (already have done some of the gruntwork)
 78 2011-09-12 00:13:15 <BlueMatt> meh, I still think it could be finished quicker if its done from current code
 79 2011-09-12 00:14:54 <luke-jr> probably.
 80 2011-09-12 00:15:13 <luke-jr> but as we all know, it's easier to write new code than to mess with old code
 81 2011-09-12 00:15:27 <luke-jr> so even if the latter is quicker, people tend to do the former
 82 2011-09-12 00:29:33 <martind> as a noob who's been browsing & lurking for a week I can't help but wonder if the Bitcoin core group isn't actually structured more like a centralised corporate model rather than a classic open source project.
 83 2011-09-12 00:29:43 <martind> I loved reading this ^ debate
 84 2011-09-12 00:30:22 <cjdelisle> martind: that's open source for ya
 85 2011-09-12 00:30:22 <luke-jr> martind: there is no real "core group"; just a few guys who think they are authority
 86 2011-09-12 00:30:42 <cjdelisle> "I want to add a feature" --> "eat shit"
 87 2011-09-12 00:30:45 <luke-jr> mainly because they were early adopters
 88 2011-09-12 00:30:49 <martind> I'm not surprised that there's a fair amount of culture clash, people appear to have quite different approaches
 89 2011-09-12 00:31:11 <martind> luke-jr: orly. it's good to hear this :D
 90 2011-09-12 00:31:29 <luke-jr> martind: as soon as someone forks it, I've got a bunch of things I'll probably submit for merging :P
 91 2011-09-12 00:31:42 <martind> cjdelisle: that's not open source, that's attitude what you descirbe
 92 2011-09-12 00:31:48 <luke-jr> at the very least, a GUI for the signmessage function
 93 2011-09-12 00:32:44 <martind> luke-jr: are you in the US? we're planning a London meetup atm
 94 2011-09-12 00:32:51 <cjdelisle> martind: what I'm saying is that kind of attitude is pretty comon if not universal throughout the open source world. People volunteer their time and don't get paid but they get the feeling of power, that's what keeps them helping and keeps the prokect going.
 95 2011-09-12 00:33:05 <luke-jr> martind: Florida
 96 2011-09-12 00:33:05 <martind> cjdelisle: no. the common attitude is "send patches"
 97 2011-09-12 00:33:08 <martind> there's a difference
 98 2011-09-12 00:33:18 <martind> luke-jr: of course :)
 99 2011-09-12 00:33:43 <martind> cjdelisle: what you're describing is badly managed OSS
100 2011-09-12 00:33:59 <martind> and yes there's a fair amount of it, but it's not the norm
101 2011-09-12 00:34:20 <phantomcircuit> i think it is the norm but most projects do a good job of hiding it
102 2011-09-12 00:34:27 <martind> heh
103 2011-09-12 00:34:28 <Cory> Can you start the default bitcoin client (not bitcoind) with the -rescan argument?
104 2011-09-12 00:34:39 <phantomcircuit> Cory, yes
105 2011-09-12 00:34:48 <Cory> Awesome, thanks!
106 2011-09-12 00:35:08 <cjdelisle> You can complain and I might agree with you (I'm not part of the cabol) but the fact is, these people are doing more for this project than you or I and, for me, that is enough to make me hold my tongue.
107 2011-09-12 00:35:39 <martind> I'm not even complaining, I'm just trying to understand this community. I'm fascinated.
108 2011-09-12 00:37:22 <luke-jr> martind: there's a lot of people doing alternate implementations
109 2011-09-12 00:37:23 <martind> I loved the contrast of Gavin and Amir on TWIS
110 2011-09-12 00:37:46 <luke-jr> martind: when people consider forking the original implementation, they realize what a mess it is and decide they're better off starting from scratch
111 2011-09-12 00:38:08 <luke-jr> when those projects start maturing, I expect we'll see a big change
112 2011-09-12 00:38:21 <cjdelisle> competition is good...
113 2011-09-12 00:38:27 <martind> well it just seems a pity to forego this one well-running network just because the governance structure needs sorting out
114 2011-09-12 00:38:45 <phantomcircuit> the issue is not governance
115 2011-09-12 00:39:02 <phantomcircuit> the current implementation is well tested but poorly designed
116 2011-09-12 00:39:14 <martind> yeah I've heard that on more than one occasion
117 2011-09-12 00:39:26 <phantomcircuit> and it's my understanding that the script engine actually had an exploitable flaw in it
118 2011-09-12 00:39:33 <luke-jr> martind: the alternatives use the same network
119 2011-09-12 00:39:34 <cjdelisle> if you think we're bad, join #bittorrent and start proposing changes, I'll hear the roar of laughter from my house.
120 2011-09-12 00:39:40 <martind> but that's not really what we're debating here, or did I misunderstand
121 2011-09-12 00:39:52 <martind> luke-jr: ah I see
122 2011-09-12 00:40:13 <martind> what are the biggest ones, besides libbitcoin?
123 2011-09-12 00:40:25 <luke-jr> martind: the blockchain forks like i0coin and SolidCoin are just bad money-making scams, not real projects
124 2011-09-12 00:40:40 <martind> why am I not surprised :D
125 2011-09-12 00:40:44 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: you still working on Python impl?
126 2011-09-12 00:40:44 <phantomcircuit> martind, bitcoinj bitcoin-alt
127 2011-09-12 00:40:49 <phantomcircuit> i dont know of any others
128 2011-09-12 00:40:53 <luke-jr> bitcoinj = Google
129 2011-09-12 00:40:53 <martind> ta :)
130 2011-09-12 00:40:56 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, no but it works kind of
131 2011-09-12 00:41:08 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: kind of?
132 2011-09-12 00:41:19 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: does it work good enough to integrate into Spesmilo? ;)
133 2011-09-12 00:41:20 <martind> are any of these alt devs Europeans?
134 2011-09-12 00:41:20 <phantomcircuit> it will download the blockchain and put it into a sql db
135 2011-09-12 00:41:31 <phantomcircuit> but it doesn't properly handle peers
136 2011-09-12 00:41:37 <luke-jr> martind: I think BC Consultancy is all European
137 2011-09-12 00:41:42 <martind> yep
138 2011-09-12 00:41:44 <phantomcircuit> im in poland
139 2011-09-12 00:41:45 <phantomcircuit> heh
140 2011-09-12 00:41:49 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: block chain reorgs? double spends?
141 2011-09-12 00:41:57 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, doesn't even try
142 2011-09-12 00:42:00 <luke-jr> >_<
143 2011-09-12 00:42:05 <phantomcircuit> it just data dumps
144 2011-09-12 00:42:08 <martind> "kind of", like he said :D
145 2011-09-12 00:42:09 <phantomcircuit> yeah i know
146 2011-09-12 00:42:31 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, i got to implementing OP_CHECKSIG and just stopped
147 2011-09-12 00:42:32 <phantomcircuit> hehe
148 2011-09-12 00:43:55 <luke-jr> -.-
149 2011-09-12 00:44:06 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: get genjix to pay you to finish it!
150 2011-09-12 00:44:12 <phantomcircuit> lol
151 2011-09-12 00:46:04 <martind> stupid/basic question. who maintains the bootstrap channel? afaik that's the one central bit of infrastructure?
152 2011-09-12 00:47:03 <luke-jr> channels-- there's 101 ;)
153 2011-09-12 00:47:09 <luke-jr> no idea tho
154 2011-09-12 00:47:26 <martind> ok
155 2011-09-12 00:48:19 <martind> it'll be interesting to see where the few centralised resources end up. trademark, domain, bootstrapping channel. I would hope that a community governance emerges, and not a self-appointed group
156 2011-09-12 00:48:40 <martind> *community governance model
157 2011-09-12 00:49:02 <phantomcircuit> mtgox is trying to register the trademark he has promised it will be for whoever wants to use it in relation to bitcoin
158 2011-09-12 00:49:14 <martind> that's not a good long-term plan
159 2011-09-12 00:49:17 <phantomcircuit> the bootstrap irc stuff is pretty much useless actually so meh
160 2011-09-12 00:49:25 <martind> as soon as they sell their company anything is possible
161 2011-09-12 00:49:28 <Joric> phantomcircuit, there's a python implementation of OP_CHECKSIG i currently working on https://github.com/joric/brutus
162 2011-09-12 00:50:00 <phantomcircuit> Joric, if you get it working i'll integrate it into bitcoin-alt
163 2011-09-12 00:50:26 <Joric> it's a complete bitcoin client, a fork from caesure
164 2011-09-12 00:50:33 <luke-jr> looks like MtGox is shooting up up up
165 2011-09-12 00:50:58 <luke-jr> Joric: I hope you don't mean a monster like the original client
166 2011-09-12 00:51:20 <luke-jr> ie, trying to be a node, wallet, and GUI all at once
167 2011-09-12 00:51:24 <ymirhotfoot> ;;ticker
168 2011-09-12 00:51:25 <gribble> Best bid: 6.18312, Best ask: 6.2, Bid-ask spread: 0.01688, Last trade: 6.22362, 24 hour volume: 161799, 24 hour low: 4.6, 24 hour high: 7.4
169 2011-09-12 00:51:57 <phantomcircuit> # for some reason many hashes are reversed, dunno why.  [this may just be block explorer?]
170 2011-09-12 00:51:58 <Joric> python core + telnet + web gui
171 2011-09-12 00:52:01 <phantomcircuit> Joric, lol...
172 2011-09-12 00:53:02 <luke-jr> Joric: >_<
173 2011-09-12 00:53:13 <luke-jr> Joric: how about just JSON-RPC so it works with Spesmilo? ;)
174 2011-09-12 00:53:33 <Joric> i hate spesmilo
175 2011-09-12 00:53:42 <luke-jr> -.-
176 2011-09-12 00:53:57 <phantomcircuit> ahahah
177 2011-09-12 00:54:29 <phantomcircuit> Joric, fyi i used the same style of decoding network messages but it isn't the best way to do it
178 2011-09-12 00:54:35 <martind> "send patches" :D
179 2011-09-12 00:54:36 <phantomcircuit> since you end up double buffering a lot of stuff
180 2011-09-12 00:55:07 <luke-jr> martind: exactly
181 2011-09-12 00:55:08 <Joric> it's 99.9 not mine check out the origin i forked )
182 2011-09-12 00:55:24 <Joric> i just made it work with testnet-in-a-box
183 2011-09-12 01:02:11 <Joric> Sam Rushing made a big job, i thought the only alternative implementation was jbitcoin
184 2011-09-12 01:02:50 <Joric> *bitcoinj, sorry )
185 2011-09-12 01:06:09 <Joric> pointbiz, i managed to snatch those 0.05, may i keep them?
186 2011-09-12 01:10:17 <luke-jr> I hope MagicalTux releases his QBitcoin core (which I presume is the same one powering MtGox now) soon :P
187 2011-09-12 01:14:51 <phantomcircuit> he is using multiple bitcoind instances
188 2011-09-12 01:15:04 <phantomcircuit> i seriously doubt he is using a custom client
189 2011-09-12 01:30:11 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: he is
190 2011-09-12 01:30:52 <jrmithdobbs> more NIH
191 2011-09-12 01:30:57 <jrmithdobbs> mtgox quality
192 2011-09-12 01:33:01 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: everyone knows bitcoind sucks ;)
193 2011-09-12 01:33:11 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: and QBitcoin has been in the works since before MT bought MtGox
194 2011-09-12 01:33:18 <jrmithdobbs> everyone knows tux's code sucks more, he keeps proving it
195 2011-09-12 01:33:31 <jrmithdobbs> and the guy before tux's code sucked even more, so you're not helping
196 2011-09-12 01:33:33 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: FUD
197 2011-09-12 01:33:46 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: really? then why's the orderbook still fucked 12+ hours later?
198 2011-09-12 01:33:53 <luke-jr> looks fine to me
199 2011-09-12 01:34:00 <luke-jr> has ever since he deployed his code
200 2011-09-12 01:34:10 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: it's still saying it hit 12+ when it didn't
201 2011-09-12 01:34:20 <jrmithdobbs> and there are still bad trades going across the websocket according to reports by several
202 2011-09-12 01:34:41 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, there were significant trading issues early on too which were rolled back
203 2011-09-12 01:34:53 <jrmithdobbs> some were rolled back, silently
204 2011-09-12 01:35:00 <phantomcircuit> no i mean months ago
205 2011-09-12 01:35:06 <jrmithdobbs> oh
206 2011-09-12 01:35:07 <phantomcircuit> or i guess 1 month ago
207 2011-09-12 01:35:08 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: never noticed.
208 2011-09-12 01:35:14 <jrmithdobbs> ya forgot about those
209 2011-09-12 01:35:17 <phantomcircuit> most people didn't
210 2011-09-12 01:35:40 <jrmithdobbs> he wrote his own mysql DAO and says prepared statements are bad
211 2011-09-12 01:35:44 <jrmithdobbs> he's just an assclown
212 2011-09-12 01:42:31 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: you also keep implying that i have some incentive to create FUD against tux instead of just restate is constant stupidity, i have nothing invested in any competitor/etc, despite rumors to the contrary, you know this right?
213 2011-09-12 01:42:39 <jrmithdobbs> just throwing that out there.
214 2011-09-12 01:50:44 <martind> jrmithdobbs: I don't blame him. I usually treat blatant disparagement with the same scepticism. there aren't many good reasons to do that in public.
215 2011-09-12 01:51:47 <jrmithdobbs> martind: eh, tux has repeatedly shown his incompetentence and willingness to lie to his customers. he doesn't even deserve common curtesy, imho
216 2011-09-12 01:52:00 <martind> :)
217 2011-09-12 01:52:14 <jrmithdobbs> but point taken ;p
218 2011-09-12 01:52:57 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: nonsense
219 2011-09-12 01:53:12 <luke-jr> admittedly, some of the early announced info when MtGox got attacked was wrong
220 2011-09-12 01:53:27 <luke-jr> but when he finally released the final report, it made sense how he was confused earlier
221 2011-09-12 01:57:23 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: he left out the parts where people were screaming the truth at him to make himself look more competent, but i digress, you've got a business relationship with the man and a vested financial interest in defending him
222 2011-09-12 01:58:02 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: he left out things he couldn't confirm
223 2011-09-12 01:58:10 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: so if anything, my comments aren't FUD, *yours* are propaganda
224 2011-09-12 01:58:22 <luke-jr> nope
225 2011-09-12 01:58:24 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: he left out that he was notified of exactly what he said in the end within 72 hours
226 2011-09-12 01:58:30 <BlueMatt> not relevant to this chan
227 2011-09-12 01:59:01 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: I highly doubt that.
228 2011-09-12 01:59:14 <luke-jr> BlueMatt's point is valid