1 2015-06-21 01:46:32 <volante> how do I get the rpc tests to run? I'm getting Unexpected exception caught during testing: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'cache/node1'
  2 2015-06-21 01:56:26 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: btw, I am working on a mempool replacement since you didn't seem interested in doing it in a policy-happy way
  3 2015-06-21 02:03:31 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, i thought about it some more
  4 2015-06-21 02:03:40 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, if you're a miner you want to mirror your own policy
  5 2015-06-21 02:03:52 <Luke-Jr> ?
  6 2015-06-21 02:03:56 <phantomcircuit> if you're a network node without any mining you want to mirror what you think the miners are doing
  7 2015-06-21 02:04:02 <phantomcircuit> which is roughly impossible
  8 2015-06-21 02:04:15 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: my design is thus:
  9 2015-06-21 02:04:25 <phantomcircuit> the only way to do that is to order by some combination of fees and age
 10 2015-06-21 02:04:44 <Luke-Jr> mempool contains N block templates, prepared and ready to go; anything falling out of those N templates is discarded
 11 2015-06-21 02:05:09 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, wont work if your local policy is radically different from miners
 12 2015-06-21 02:05:10 <Luke-Jr> mempool also has 2 other pools for transactions it will not mine, 1 in strict RBF style, and 1 FIFO style
 13 2015-06-21 02:05:17 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: won't work for what?
 14 2015-06-21 02:05:43 <Luke-Jr> it will work for keeping memory usage bound, and being able to mine yourself
 15 2015-06-21 02:05:52 <Luke-Jr> and for being able to relay transactions
 16 2015-06-21 02:06:16 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, you'll end up with ancient transactions in your mempool
 17 2015-06-21 02:06:28 <Luke-Jr> so?
 18 2015-06-21 02:10:14 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, i guess the default policy could be something that takes into account age
 19 2015-06-21 02:10:28 <phantomcircuit> but then it's going to be the opposite of the local miner selection policy...
 20 2015-06-21 02:11:32 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, the wallet uses (should use?) the mempool to estimate fees
 21 2015-06-21 02:11:49 <phantomcircuit> it cant do that if your idea of what policy should be is radically different and there isn't an aging effect
 22 2015-06-21 02:11:52 <phantomcircuit> fun right
 23 2015-06-21 02:12:02 <Luke-Jr> bleh
 24 2015-06-21 02:12:40 <Luke-Jr> what if we drop our first template worth of txs when a new block is processed?
 25 2015-06-21 02:12:56 <Luke-Jr> hmm, that won't work
 26 2015-06-21 02:13:31 <Luke-Jr> maybe it just needs aging then..
 27 2015-06-21 02:14:03 <Luke-Jr> for each block processed, age all txs in your first template; when they hit N, discard
 28 2015-06-21 02:35:46 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, heh
 29 2015-06-21 02:35:50 <phantomcircuit> not so easy now eh?
 30 2015-06-21 03:07:20 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: I think that last idea will work :p
 31 2015-06-21 03:07:44 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, ok now make it fast
 32 2015-06-21 03:07:56 <Luke-Jr> :p
 33 2015-06-21 03:07:56 <phantomcircuit> creating a bunch of blocks isn't going to be fast
 34 2015-06-21 03:08:01 <Luke-Jr> doing this right is complicated
 35 2015-06-21 03:08:14 <Luke-Jr> I'm not "creating a bunch of blocks" like CNB
 36 2015-06-21 03:08:20 <Luke-Jr> I'm inserting new transactions into position
 37 2015-06-21 03:09:46 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, so why not just one giant block sorted by some priority functions f(feerate, age) ?
 38 2015-06-21 03:33:45 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: because policy is more complicated than one priority function :P
 39 2015-06-21 03:43:32 <hey_joe> i think i have exceded my daily API call limit on blockchain.info, or i am officially banned from making requests... is this a thing? how do i prevent this aside from throttling my applications API requests?
 40 2015-06-21 03:43:44 <hey_joe> at this point I may just need to run bitcoind correct?
 41 2015-06-21 03:44:09 <hey_joe> i will also want to be able to make instant transactions. or at least as instant as they can be.
 42 2015-06-21 03:45:00 <Luke-Jr> hey_joe: bc.i is not a #bitcoin-dev topic
 43 2015-06-21 03:45:23 <hey_joe> thanks
 44 2015-06-21 03:45:41 <hey_joe> is there a channel for bc.i?
 45 2015-06-21 03:46:01 <hey_joe> wait
 46 2015-06-21 03:46:10 <hey_joe> isnt bitcoind ot?
 47 2015-06-21 03:46:17 <hey_joe> i mean on topic?
 48 2015-06-21 03:47:25 <hey_joe> and wouldnt running bitcoind allot me the capability to replace bc.i all together in my application?
 49 2015-06-21 03:48:43 <Luke-Jr> hey_joe: usage of bitcoind is on topic in #bitcoin
 50 2015-06-21 07:25:53 <jgarzik> 550-5.7.1 [216.34.181.88      12] Our system has detected that this message is
 51 2015-06-21 07:25:53 <jgarzik> host alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com [173.194.204.26]:
 52 2015-06-21 07:25:53 <jgarzik> SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data:
 53 2015-06-21 07:25:54 <jgarzik> 550 5.7.1 https://support.google.com/mail/answer/188131 for more information. r29si15783984qkr.116 - gsmtp [REDACTED EMAIL ADDR]
 54 2015-06-21 07:25:54 <jgarzik> 550-5.7.1 likely unsolicited mail. To reduce the amount of spam sent to Gmail,
 55 2015-06-21 07:25:54 <jgarzik> 550-5.7.1 this message has been blocked. Please visit
 56 2015-06-21 07:26:10 <jgarzik> warren, SF mailman just shit itself
 57 2015-06-21 07:26:18 <jgarzik> warren, all @gmail addresses are now bouncing
 58 2015-06-21 07:26:32 <jgarzik> warren, might have to move lists sooner than expected
 59 2015-06-21 07:28:19 <jgarzik> warren, Googling is bouncing, and then SF mailman unsubscribes the address
 60 2015-06-21 07:28:27 <jgarzik> multiply by several hundred, possibly 1000+
 61 2015-06-21 07:32:30 <gmaxwell> yea, I was just unsubbed from sf bitcoin-development, "great"
 62 2015-06-21 07:32:34 <gmaxwell> well I suppose our timing was good.
 63 2015-06-21 10:00:31 <fanquake> ;;blocks
 64 2015-06-21 10:00:31 <gribble> 361876
 65 2015-06-21 10:27:42 <jonasschnelli> phantomcircuit: [04:11:32] Luke-Jr, the wallet uses (should use?) the mempool to estimate fees.:  What if the mempool listens to a signal that is capable of serving the current feerate per kb? If we once like to have a SPV mode, the mempool interaction from wallet.cpp has to go away
 66 2015-06-21 10:28:05 <jonasschnelli> *sorry, not the current. The *estimated*
 67 2015-06-21 10:31:01 <jonasschnelli> If we run in SPV mode, the feerate served by the mempool would be a (probably) static (or someone finds a clever method to estimate fees in spv mode)
 68 2015-06-21 10:51:10 <jtimon> janasschnelli sure, rebase the things in the order you want, I was assuming #5934 and #6006 are complementary
 69 2015-06-21 11:14:23 <jtimon> sipa any news on the version bits code?
 70 2015-06-21 11:28:07 <jonasschnelli> jtimon: right. They could be complementary. Will rebase both.
 71 2015-06-21 11:32:29 <jtimon> janasschnelli great
 72 2015-06-21 12:27:10 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: I'm not sure SPV fee estimations are a good idea.
 73 2015-06-21 12:27:26 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: not only is it unreliable to trust random nodes, but it can be an incentive to use a full node
 74 2015-06-21 12:42:36 <jtimon> would anybody oppose to removing the reserved space for free transactions and priority code?
 75 2015-06-21 12:42:57 <Luke-Jr> jtimon: yes
 76 2015-06-21 12:43:19 <Luke-Jr> jtimon: very strongly, if you mean making it difficult to add back
 77 2015-06-21 12:43:56 <jtimon> would a unified priority + fees heuristic be better?
 78 2015-06-21 12:44:23 <jtimon> the code complexity that I want to reduce comes from having twp separate cases
 79 2015-06-21 12:44:31 <sipa> volantis was working on maintained an index sorted by priority and feerate
 80 2015-06-21 12:44:52 <sipa> to simplify/speed up block creation using it
 81 2015-06-21 12:45:19 <Luke-Jr> I'm working on a new mempool that handles this gracefully FYI
 82 2015-06-21 12:45:27 <Luke-Jr> bbiab
 83 2015-06-21 12:46:30 <jtimon> Luke-Jr so no seprated spaces? cool
 84 2015-06-21 12:46:57 <btcdrak> gmaxwell: jgarzik: I was also unsubbed from the list. Unexpected ML hard fork it seems.
 85 2015-06-21 13:03:44 <jtimon> sipa given that you were asking for it, I rebased 6009 with the hope that you may have time to re-review it and merged it, it seems trivial enough not to be too risky disturbing to other PRs
 86 2015-06-21 13:04:56 <jtimon> sipa I mean to me #6051 is similarly trivial and it would be better to merge thaat first not to lose the moveonly-verification review cfields did, but #6009 doesn't need to be blocked by #6051
 87 2015-06-21 13:53:11 <kanzure> warren: i also received a similar email
 88 2015-06-21 13:53:23 <sipa> i saw hundreds of bounces last night
 89 2015-06-21 13:53:28 <sipa> i think a bug at gmail or sf
 90 2015-06-21 13:53:38 <kanzure> poor sourceforge
 91 2015-06-21 13:58:06 <waxwing> sourceforge is all like 'no, you're not breaking up with me, *i'm* breaking up with *you*!
 92 2015-06-21 14:01:21 <sipa> ;;nethash
 93 2015-06-21 14:01:22 <gribble> 340601903.052
 94 2015-06-21 15:32:27 <Luke-Jr> hmm
 95 2015-06-21 15:32:51 <Luke-Jr> Linux apparently drops packets when conntrack is full.. even when conntrack is not used/needed O.o
 96 2015-06-21 15:33:04 <Luke-Jr> which.. appears to be a problem with bitcoin-seeder?
 97 2015-06-21 15:35:15 <Diablo-D3> Luke-Jr: uh, what
 98 2015-06-21 15:35:34 <Diablo-D3> citation needed
 99 2015-06-21 15:41:09 <venzen> hi all, i need some help by way of explanation
100 2015-06-21 15:41:38 <venzen> if this XT chain is set up as a concurrent blockchain next week
101 2015-06-21 15:41:47 <venzen> do the 2 chains know about oneanother?
102 2015-06-21 15:42:11 <venzen> do the clients know, i guess is the better question
103 2015-06-21 15:58:28 <Luke-Jr> venzen: ##altcoin-dev
104 2015-06-21 16:14:16 <venzen> :D
105 2015-06-21 17:27:45 <onefox> Hello, i would like to generate multible public bitcoin keys from one seed in javascript, is there a way without bip39 ?
106 2015-06-21 17:29:32 <Luke-Jr> sounds like a bad idea regardless
107 2015-06-21 17:32:57 <onefox> :D isn't that what all the html 5 wallets do?
108 2015-06-21 17:35:52 <onefox> my goal is that 2 people can safely trade goods while thiere funds are in a multisig address, and i don't want to use the same public key to generate a new multisig on every trade.
109 2015-06-21 17:36:06 <onefox> and the keys should be easy to backup
110 2015-06-21 17:37:25 <onefox> or is bip39 the best way to generate the keys?
111 2015-06-21 18:02:43 <jonasschnelli> onefox: don't use bip39 for that. Just go with standard bip32.
112 2015-06-21 18:04:02 <jonasschnelli> derive the extended non hardened public key of the external chain and us it for you multisig address generation.
113 2015-06-21 18:05:02 <jonasschnelli> I'm not sure if JavaScript is the best idea. Better do it server side and try to not reveal the public key of the external chain.
114 2015-06-21 18:05:31 <onefox> i would like to give the user full controll... so that the private keys never touch the server...
115 2015-06-21 18:06:52 <jonasschnelli> onefox: that's important. Right. You only need to share a nonhardened extended public key to derive pubkeys/addresses
116 2015-06-21 18:07:15 <jonasschnelli> onefox: but why javascript?
117 2015-06-21 18:08:12 <sipa> the only safe way to do this in javascript is probably popping up an error message with "this operation cannot be safely performed in a browser"
118 2015-06-21 18:08:14 <onefox> it should run on the users browser together with some other stuff
119 2015-06-21 18:08:58 <jonasschnelli> sipa: +1
120 2015-06-21 18:11:08 <jonasschnelli> Don't use browsers and their JavaScript stacks for crypto operations. To many attack vectors. If you have - as example - Google Adwords on the same page.... Good luck. :-)
121 2015-06-21 18:11:08 <onefox> i would like to cover the whole tech stuff so that the user only need to backup one seed and don't need to think about multisig.
122 2015-06-21 18:11:30 <onefox> yes or extentions.. i know
123 2015-06-21 18:12:11 <jonasschnelli> onefox: users should create their master seed in a different software (wallet) and only upload a ext. pubkey
124 2015-06-21 18:12:53 <onefox> mmh its to early to tell that to an end customer :(
125 2015-06-21 18:13:46 <onefox> most of them just got thiere blockchain or phone wallet and know how to send coins somewhere
126 2015-06-21 18:16:18 <onefox> the funds should not stay in the multisig, just for the time of the trade, and than they will be transfert to an payout address in their wallets.
127 2015-06-21 18:21:05 <jonasschnelli> onefox: create a iOS/Android app that creates a HD wallet and allows one to export a ext. pub. key. Maybe add a bip39 import for users who like to re-create already existing structures.
128 2015-06-21 18:21:18 <jonasschnelli> A such app would be done within 2-3days.
129 2015-06-21 18:21:29 <onefox> thats true
130 2015-06-21 18:21:52 <onefox> web.hivewallet is doing all the stuff in js or?
131 2015-06-21 18:22:19 <jonasschnelli> onefox: i don't know.
132 2015-06-21 18:22:24 <onefox> okey
133 2015-06-21 18:23:47 <jonasschnelli> personally i would never use a browser for such operations.
134 2015-06-21 18:24:23 <onefox> yes but the normal non dev person would, like my mom^^
135 2015-06-21 18:28:32 <jonasschnelli> onefox: i'd like to see bitcoin succeed and like to avoid more of the mt.gox like webwallet hacks articles in the press. This is why i recommend devs to keep a good eye on security. And with browsers your open so many door which should be shut.
136 2015-06-21 18:28:47 <jonasschnelli> *doors
137 2015-06-21 18:29:43 <onefox> thats right :)
138 2015-06-21 19:19:27 <warren> gmaxwell: jgarzik: Luke-Jr: jonasschnelli: Do you think we should wait for the scheduled switchover date on Tuesday, or should I attempt to get the LF sysadmin to respond on a Sunday to move it now?
139 2015-06-21 19:21:09 <jonasschnelli> warren: what does the "move" action involves? archive re-copy to LF? Is it bad if it runs in parallel for some days?
140 2015-06-21 19:21:30 <warren> we decided it would be bad to run them in parallel
141 2015-06-21 19:21:55 <warren> the move itself could be < 5 minutes if sipa or jgarzik are here when the sysadmin can do it.
142 2015-06-21 19:22:57 <warren> jgarzik: you available?
143 2015-06-21 19:25:25 <warren> sipa: you here?
144 2015-06-21 19:25:55 <jgarzik> on phone but yes
145 2015-06-21 19:32:38 <jgarzik> jonasschnelli, 3D printing is a bit down the road.  Using off-the-shelf ("COTS") commodity parts as much as possible for the cubesats.  Cheap hardware + smart software building a mesh network in space.
146 2015-06-21 19:32:42 <sipa> i am available
147 2015-06-21 19:34:08 <warren> trying to contact the sysadmin
148 2015-06-21 19:38:51 <warren> jgarzik: where is your GPG key?
149 2015-06-21 19:40:14 <jgarzik> warren, https://bitcoin.org/en/development
150 2015-06-21 19:40:35 <jgarzik> warren, jgarzik@pobox.com or jgarzik@bitpay.com keys work.
151 2015-06-21 19:46:44 <warren> Key fingerprint = 60B0 0235 B335 5D84 BF2A  4E35 DA1D C20F 2DBF 0CA8
152 2015-06-21 19:46:44 <warren> pub   4096R/2DBF0CA8 2011-02-09 [expires: 2016-02-08]
153 2015-06-21 19:46:51 <warren> jgarzik: I had this key from a while ago, you still have it?
154 2015-06-21 19:48:12 <jgarzik> warren, yes, but the email address associated with it is dead (jgarzik@exmulti.com)
155 2015-06-21 19:48:18 <warren> oh
156 2015-06-21 19:48:33 <jgarzik> I have the key in my keyring
157 2015-06-21 19:50:38 <warren> http://pgp.cs.uu.nl/mk_path.cgi?FROM=347DC10D&TO=7ADCA079&PATHS=trust+paths
158 2015-06-21 19:50:43 <warren> not too many paths
159 2015-06-21 19:51:18 <warren> jgarzik: could you get a key into here alongside the other devs?  https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/contrib/gitian-downloader
160 2015-06-21 19:51:53 <jgarzik> I tend to think PGP keysigning is masturbation and WoT is mostly useless
161 2015-06-21 19:52:22 <jgarzik> e.g. "sipa" I know better from online interactions.  Whether or not "sipa" is this person Pieter Wuillle who presents a passport as ID is another question.
162 2015-06-21 19:52:26 <jgarzik> online fingerprint
163 2015-06-21 19:53:24 <warren> jgarzik: could you at least sign your new key with the old key?
164 2015-06-21 19:55:28 <jgarzik> warren, http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/psa3-pobox.txt http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/psa3-bitpay.txt
165 2015-06-21 19:56:18 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: the pgp spec allows you to flag how you've identitifed keys, so you could indicate you haven't checked ID so that someone doing something where ID checking is relevant wouldn't be mislead by your signature; unfortunately its use is discouraged because it leaks data about how you interacted with someone (I think a stupid concern realtive to publishing the signature in the first place...) ::si
166 2015-06-21 19:56:24 <gmaxwell> gh::
167 2015-06-21 19:57:09 <warren> jgarzik: sign your new key with the old key and push it to the key servers please?
168 2015-06-21 19:57:34 <warren> jgarzik: http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xDA1DC20F2DBF0CA8  old key was signed by Gavin and Wladimir
169 2015-06-21 19:57:48 <jgarzik> warren, you are requesting a lot of work for unknown and unexplained reasons, traveling down a path I just noted I think is pointless
170 2015-06-21 19:58:28 <warren> less work than the pastes you just made ...
171 2015-06-21 19:58:58 <jgarzik> the pastes were made ages ago
172 2015-06-21 20:01:54 <warren> jgarzik: sipa: The sysadmin is available at 2pm PDT, let's move the list at that time, ok?
173 2015-06-21 20:02:37 <jgarzik> sure
174 2015-06-21 20:02:43 <warren> k
175 2015-06-21 20:03:28 <moomoo20> hi, do coinbase transactions support op_return?
176 2015-06-21 20:04:26 <justanotherusr> moomoo20: yes but there's not really a point. Also #bitcoin
177 2015-06-21 20:05:27 <sipa> warren: i checked earlier today and the list had 1400 subscribers
178 2015-06-21 20:05:37 <sipa> warren: certainly not everyone was kicked off
179 2015-06-21 20:05:59 <sipa> i was not kicked off, but maybe the effect did not include admins
180 2015-06-21 20:08:44 <sipa> jgarzik: imho the problem is a social one, not a technical one. I could create a gpg identity which has no real-life identity associated with it, just claiming to be github.com/sipa (and maybe other virtual identities), and people could sign my claim after verifying my access to those accounts
181 2015-06-21 20:11:54 <jgarzik> sipa, yep and I think that's just fine
182 2015-06-21 20:12:04 <jgarzik> b/c online can sometimes be more real and relevant than offline
183 2015-06-21 20:12:46 <jgarzik> *poof*
184 2015-06-21 20:13:12 <michagogo> petertodd: you *did* run gsign for Windows, right?
185 2015-06-21 20:13:27 <warren> sipa: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/contrib/gitian-downloader/sipa-key.pgp  should I use this key?
186 2015-06-21 20:13:35 <michagogo> Never heard of a signature just not appearing
187 2015-06-21 20:15:04 <warren> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev  Everyone please subscribe to the new list, it opens after 9pm UTC.
188 2015-06-21 20:16:12 <warren> brb 40 minutes, on a call
189 2015-06-21 20:16:21 <btcdrak> thanks warren
190 2015-06-21 20:36:14 <aschildbach> No new posts in gmane.comp.bitcoin.devel since 2 hours. Did anyone think of switching gmane over to the new list?
191 2015-06-21 20:37:41 <sipa> aschildbach: SF is borked
192 2015-06-21 20:37:51 <sipa> we are switching in an hour
193 2015-06-21 20:38:07 <sipa> ah, swithching gmane
194 2015-06-21 20:38:19 <sipa> how would one do that?
195 2015-06-21 20:38:45 <warren> gmane was probably unsubscribed
196 2015-06-21 20:38:59 <aschildbach> Good question. I've never done that.
197 2015-06-21 20:40:07 <hearn> you have to contact them manually, iirc
198 2015-06-21 20:46:06 <rnicoll> thanks warren!
199 2015-06-21 21:03:38 <aschildbach> Shall I fill it out and mention the mailing list move in the comments?
200 2015-06-21 21:03:38 <aschildbach> There is a form for subscribing a mailing list at: http://gmane.org/subscribe.php
201 2015-06-21 21:05:35 <warren> jgarzik: emsearcy: you both ready/
202 2015-06-21 21:05:58 <emsearcy> yeah, I'll delete the previous imoport now; then I can import as soon as a new dump is available
203 2015-06-21 21:06:14 <warren> jgarzik: please change the list options to auto-reject all posts and make a final archive dump
204 2015-06-21 21:06:33 <warren> sipa: or you can?
205 2015-06-21 21:06:38 <sipa> fetching an mbox file now
206 2015-06-21 21:09:08 <emsearcy> *is ready
207 2015-06-21 21:10:16 <Luke-Jr> warren: IMO the ML is too noisy. a few days break will be good for it :P
208 2015-06-21 21:11:19 <btcdrak> an LF admin needs to add mail-archive .com too: https://www.mail-archive.com/faq.html#newlist
209 2015-06-21 21:12:29 <emsearcy> btcdrak: the LF won't be managing the membership list, which I think is what is needed by mail-archive.com, there should be a project admin/moderator who can help with that
210 2015-06-21 21:12:40 <emsearcy> warren: ? ^
211 2015-06-21 21:13:11 <btcdrak> emsearcy: well that's what I meant, a LF bitcoin list admin
212 2015-06-21 21:13:17 <warren> btcdrak: ok
213 2015-06-21 21:13:19 <emsearcy> btcdrak: ah, ok
214 2015-06-21 21:13:53 <sipa> uploading mbox file
215 2015-06-21 21:14:03 <sipa> crappy wifi here, give me a minute
216 2015-06-21 21:14:28 <emsearcy> despite my IRC hostmask, I'm the Linux Foundation contact on this btw (LF IT Infrastructure Manager)
217 2015-06-21 21:15:29 <sipa> http://bitcoin.sipa.be/bitcoin-dev.mbox
218 2015-06-21 21:15:40 <emsearcy> sipa: thanks
219 2015-06-21 21:15:48 <sipa> do you want a gpg signature on that file?
220 2015-06-21 21:16:43 <warren> sipa: new posts rejected?
221 2015-06-21 21:17:08 <sipa> same url with .sig added is a gpg signature
222 2015-06-21 21:19:29 <sipa> i set everyone's moderation bit, and set an autoresponder which directs to the new url
223 2015-06-21 21:19:40 <emsearcy> sipa, warren: import complete
224 2015-06-21 21:19:54 <warren> ok, opening new list
225 2015-06-21 21:19:59 <emsearcy> confirmed new messages show up, not testing messages from last days: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/thread.html
226 2015-06-21 21:20:56 <emsearcy> s/not testing messages/but not the testing messages/
227 2015-06-21 21:21:10 <warren> sipa: for description, how about: "Development discussion list for Bitcoin protocol and Bitcoin Core."
228 2015-06-21 21:22:25 <sipa> i'd just say "Development discussion list for the Bitcoin protocol and implementations" ?
229 2015-06-21 21:22:29 <s7r> or better "Development discussion list for Bitcoin protocol and its implementation"
230 2015-06-21 21:22:43 <s7r> oh, mind-to-mind
231 2015-06-21 21:23:25 <s7r> since someone who wants to code another implementation would ask questions on this list as well
232 2015-06-21 21:24:35 <warren> ok, I'm trying to figure out the option to auto-reject non-subscribers instead of holding it ...
233 2015-06-21 21:25:21 <sipa> is the new list open?
234 2015-06-21 21:25:25 <warren> yes
235 2015-06-21 21:25:30 <warren> I should do a post.
236 2015-06-21 21:26:01 <sipa> yes, do it
237 2015-06-21 21:26:16 <emsearcy> warren: let me know if you want assistance on options
238 2015-06-21 21:26:26 <sipa> emsearcy: thanks a lot for your help so far
239 2015-06-21 21:29:05 <jgarzik> emsearcy, sipa, warren:  Sorry for the delay, was a detainee at a local tacqueria
240 2015-06-21 21:29:17 <jgarzik> Sounds like sipa has things in hand -- anything I need to do to help move M-L?
241 2015-06-21 21:29:39 <sipa> warren: received your mail
242 2015-06-21 21:30:08 <warren> jgarzik: seems we're good now, thanks.
243 2015-06-21 21:30:11 <jgarzik> great
244 2015-06-21 21:34:21 <btcdrak> nicely done. is mail-archive setup now also?
245 2015-06-21 21:35:21 <warren> btcdrak: find the instructions to re-subscribe lists at the other archives
246 2015-06-21 21:35:39 <btcdrak> oh seems it's already on: http://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org/
247 2015-06-21 21:36:08 <warren> has all the test posts =)
248 2015-06-21 21:36:15 <warren> and a few days of archives are missing
249 2015-06-21 21:36:28 <sipa> hmm?
250 2015-06-21 21:36:40 <sipa> emsearcy imported my dump from a few minutes ago
251 2015-06-21 21:37:55 <warren> that separate archive imported the test archive
252 2015-06-21 21:38:48 <emsearcy> hey folks, I forgot to fix ownership on the archives when I imported (done now), which is why the LF pipermail isn't showing any of the test messages that have been being sent
253 2015-06-21 21:39:15 <emsearcy> I should be able to resumbit to archive, though
254 2015-06-21 21:39:34 <warren> http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/thread.html  that's why my post is missing here?
255 2015-06-21 21:40:32 <emsearcy> (done)
256 2015-06-21 21:40:41 <emsearcy> warren: yes
257 2015-06-21 21:40:52 <emsearcy> hence why we're testing :-)  it should show up now
258 2015-06-21 21:41:14 <aschildbach> You guys rock!
259 2015-06-21 21:42:37 <warren> emsearcy: do you know how to chagne the list config to auto-reject non subscribed posts?  (but hold spam, so it isn't abused for spamming itself)
260 2015-06-21 21:42:57 <warren> want to have the auto-reject for non-subscribers tell them how to subscribe
261 2015-06-21 21:43:12 <emsearcy> Action to take for postings from non-members for which no explicit action is defined -> discard or reject
262 2015-06-21 21:43:23 <emsearcy> war (on Privacy->Senders)
263 2015-06-21 21:43:28 <emsearcy> warren: ^
264 2015-06-21 21:43:56 <emsearcy> "Text to include in any rejection notice to be sent to non-members who post to this list" is there too
265 2015-06-21 21:45:08 <emsearcy> admin/privacy/spam has the spam setting (I just added a rule for X-Spam-Status), which to my knowledge applies to all posts including member posts
266 2015-06-21 21:46:35 <warren> emsearcy: what does "Defer" do?
267 2015-06-21 21:46:52 <emsearcy> warren: if you or other bitcoin-dev-owner people are interested in getting any kind of log dumps, we have a couple options, including web based log-search tool and sending weekly emails.  We've had other people want a weekly list of subscribes, for example.
268 2015-06-21 21:47:39 <warren> emsearcy: I think we've been content to leave it on auto-pilot, we don't really care about following subscribers.
269 2015-06-21 21:48:45 <emsearcy> warren: good question. that probably should be Hold. I know in the context of held messages, "defer" is the action that means (leave in held queue).  I'm not sure what it means in the context of a non-held message.
270 2015-06-21 21:50:30 <emsearcy> mailman docs mention that "defer" in the queue admin interface means "decide later"
271 2015-06-21 21:50:41 <warren> that seems awfully ambiguous =)
272 2015-06-21 21:51:58 <warren> somebody please post a new thread to the list, testing something else.
273 2015-06-21 21:53:04 <warren> http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/  please vote up "If you were subscribed to the bitcoin-development mailing list, you need to resubscribe. The list is being moved."
274 2015-06-21 21:56:59 <warren> emsearcy: set it to "Hold" as "Defer" doesn't seem to be useful?
275 2015-06-21 22:04:58 <sipa> CodeShark: did you get an autoreply saying you should move to the new list?
276 2015-06-21 22:05:10 <sipa> test
277 2015-06-21 22:05:16 <CodeShark> yep
278 2015-06-21 22:05:25 <sipa> cool
279 2015-06-21 22:05:48 <CodeShark> I thought the move was happening on tuesday
280 2015-06-21 22:06:42 <sipa> sourceforge somehow though it received bounces of several hundred users earlier today
281 2015-06-21 22:06:48 <sipa> and removed them from the list
282 2015-06-21 22:06:55 <sipa> so we've proceeded a bit faster
283 2015-06-21 22:07:32 <CodeShark> yeah, what was with those bounces?
284 2015-06-21 22:07:38 <sipa> no clue
285 2015-06-21 22:08:28 <warren> emsearcy: Sourceforge + gmail seemed to get stuck in a reject bounce loop and hundreds of people were unsubscribed from the SF list today, we really need to fix LF's mailman for the DKIM issue.  I'll help update the EL6 package for this later this week.
286 2015-06-21 22:09:37 <CodeShark> so from now on I should send to bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org ?
287 2015-06-21 22:09:52 <emsearcy> warren: thansk.  if I don't get a response in a couple days on RH issue I'll ping our rep, that usually gets a much faster response
288 2015-06-21 22:09:54 <harding_> CodeShark: yes, but you have to be subscribed first.
289 2015-06-21 22:10:01 <CodeShark> I did that a couple days ago
290 2015-06-21 22:10:11 <harding_> CodeShark: then you should be good.
291 2015-06-21 22:10:20 <warren> emsearcy: I wouldn't be optimistic about Red Hat fixing this quickly enough.
292 2015-06-21 22:10:53 <CodeShark> but the people who haven't migrated will probably miss our messages, no?
293 2015-06-21 22:11:15 <CodeShark> or does it automatically forward to sourceforge?
294 2015-06-21 22:11:22 <warren> hmm
295 2015-06-21 22:11:29 <warren> my non-subscribed user post went straight into the list
296 2015-06-21 22:12:25 <harding> CodeShark: yes.  Hopefully once they realize that there's a problem, they'll read the archives to catch-up.
297 2015-06-21 22:16:07 <warren> emsearcy: not sure how my post from the not subscribed warren@togami.com went straight into the list, could you please take a look?
298 2015-06-21 22:17:36 <emsearcy> warren: checking. no idea ... maybe because there's no admin? That wouldn't make sense but its the only thing that seems abnormal to me
299 2015-06-21 22:18:25 <warren> I added myself as admin temporarily, pretty sure that isn't the issue though.
300 2015-06-21 22:19:47 <emsearcy> warren: I added mailman-owner@lists.linuxfoundation.org too (not sure if I clobbered your change).  I tried to post and got expected result
301 2015-06-21 22:19:50 <emsearcy> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev Posting
302 2015-06-21 22:19:52 <emsearcy> to bitcoin-dev requires that you first subscribe.  If you so choose,
303 2015-06-21 22:19:55 <emsearcy> you may subscribe and turn off mail delivery in the member options.
304 2015-06-21 22:19:58 <emsearcy> (posting from eric@linuxfoundation.org)
305 2015-06-21 22:20:40 <warren> emsearcy: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008982.html
306 2015-06-21 22:20:57 <emsearcy> warren: only other change I made was "Should messages from non-members, which are automatically discarded, be forwarded to the list moderator?", in case "discarded" = "discarded or rejected" and there was some kind of logic to pass through messages when this forward failed...
307 2015-06-21 22:22:08 <warren> I'll do one more test post.
308 2015-06-21 22:22:24 <emsearcy> warren: ok. I forwarded my reject notice to your apache mail
309 2015-06-21 22:23:23 <warren> you mean my @apache.org post happened right before you changed the settings?
310 2015-06-21 22:23:28 <warren> I'll do a test #3
311 2015-06-21 22:23:59 <warren> emsearcy: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008983.html
312 2015-06-21 22:24:46 <emsearcy> warren: elombrozo is a member
313 2015-06-21 22:26:45 <warren> emsearcy: we still have a problem ... http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008985.html
314 2015-06-21 22:27:30 <emsearcy> warren: it's possible it's testing list membership based on envelope sender
315 2015-06-21 22:27:42 <emsearcy> warren: can you tell me what the message ID of that message you sent is?
316 2015-06-21 22:27:42 <warren> oh
317 2015-06-21 22:28:43 <CodeShark> I sent a message - don't see it
318 2015-06-21 22:29:10 <emsearcy> Jun 21 22:25:04 mail postfix/cleanup[8764]: 795D7B8C: message-id=<CAEz79PqgjHdd_-8uce4e9-N4qB9_R9jXbW3d9Ro6O90RYux_pQ@mail.gmail.com>
319 2015-06-21 22:29:10 <emsearcy> warren: because I suspect it's this one:
320 2015-06-21 22:29:13 <emsearcy> Jun 21 22:25:04 mail postfix/qmgr[1274]: 795D7B8C: from=<wtogami@gmail.com>, size=2869, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
321 2015-06-21 22:29:26 <warren> emsearcy: you're right, thanks.
322 2015-06-21 22:29:53 <emsearcy> ok, great. I guess we can remove the admin email again, then ;-)
323 2015-06-21 22:29:59 <CodeShark> I had sent a test message a couple days ago that went through - but I just sent one a few minutes ago and I still don't see it.
324 2015-06-21 22:30:12 <emsearcy> (you were totally write that the admin email had nothing to do with it)
325 2015-06-21 22:30:22 <emsearcy> *right. can't spell on Sundays I guess
326 2015-06-21 22:30:35 <emsearcy> CodeShark: maybe greylisted
327 2015-06-21 22:30:42 <warren> emsearcy: let me know if Red Hat responds, otherwise I'll work on a package for you late in the week.
328 2015-06-21 22:30:57 <emsearcy> CodeShark: pm me your email address?
329 2015-06-21 22:31:06 <warren> emsearcy: you are using postfix + sqlgrey?
330 2015-06-21 22:31:17 <emsearcy> warren: yes
331 2015-06-21 22:31:43 <warren> emsearcy: back when I used sqlgrey I had a rule that bypassed greylisting if they were listed in https://www.dnswl.org/
332 2015-06-21 22:31:53 <warren> dnswl was good years ago, dunno about now.
333 2015-06-21 22:32:52 <emsearcy> warren: I'll take a look.  Like I mentioned the other day, I haven't run into non-compliant senders in years
334 2015-06-21 22:33:35 <warren> I removed sqlgrey from my server a few years ago because some big government contractor e-mail server was totally broken... can't remember which.
335 2015-06-21 22:35:36 <s7r> warren i have received your test #3 too, from the unsubscribed address
336 2015-06-21 22:35:49 <warren> s7r: we figured out the problem
337 2015-06-21 22:37:27 <CodeShark> it seems I've been graylisted on both MLs now
338 2015-06-21 22:37:32 <CodeShark> wtf?
339 2015-06-21 22:37:37 <emsearcy> seems like stuff is working, so I'll step out again, but I'll be around if needed
340 2015-06-21 22:37:53 <sipa> CodeShark: greylisting is just slowing down messages
341 2015-06-21 22:38:29 <CodeShark> Your mail to 'Bitcoin-development' with the subject
342 2015-06-21 22:38:30 <CodeShark> Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
343 2015-06-21 22:38:30 <CodeShark> Re: [Bitcoin-development] F2Pool has enabled full replace-by-fee
344 2015-06-21 22:38:39 <CodeShark> I never got that before
345 2015-06-21 22:38:52 <CodeShark> this is from sourceforge
346 2015-06-21 22:38:52 <sipa> yes
347 2015-06-21 22:38:54 <emsearcy> CodeShark: that has nothing to do with greylisting, that's moderation
348 2015-06-21 22:39:00 <sipa> that's because i disabled posting to the old list
349 2015-06-21 22:39:16 <CodeShark> ok :)
350 2015-06-21 22:39:30 <sipa> and i saw no easier way than to mass-set the 'moderator' bit
351 2015-06-21 22:39:34 <CodeShark> the error message should be more clear then :)
352 2015-06-21 22:39:45 <CodeShark> lots of people are going to be confused
353 2015-06-21 22:39:59 <sipa> i can't change the moderation message
354 2015-06-21 22:40:17 <sipa> but i can mention in the autorespond that they will get a moderator one
355 2015-06-21 22:40:24 <gmaxwell> we can send periodic messages through to the list to point out that the list has moved.
356 2015-06-21 22:40:34 <emsearcy> sipa: if you mass unsubscribe people from sf.net, can you provide a reason?
357 2015-06-21 22:40:44 <CodeShark> this is why I usually prefer to write my own systems from scratch rather than using large frameworks. very simple, practically trivial changes become monumental tasks :p
358 2015-06-21 22:40:48 <sipa> emsearcy: i haven't mass unsubscribed
359 2015-06-21 22:40:54 <sipa> emsearcy: just set moderation in mass
360 2015-06-21 22:40:58 <sipa> do you have a better suggestion?
361 2015-06-21 22:41:43 <warren> sipa: does sf's mailman have the option to Reject under Privacy options -> Sender filters ?
362 2015-06-21 22:42:47 <sipa> i don't see that
363 2015-06-21 22:42:52 <emsearcy> (and "Text to include in any rejection notice to be sent to moderated members who post to this list.")
364 2015-06-21 22:42:59 <sipa> ah
365 2015-06-21 22:43:09 <CodeShark> heh
366 2015-06-21 22:43:14 <warren> Accept
367 2015-06-21 22:43:14 <warren> Action to take for postings from non-members for which no explicit action is defined.
368 2015-06-21 22:43:14 <warren> (Details for generic_nonmember_action)
369 2015-06-21 22:43:39 <emsearcy> well, if sipa hasn't unsubscribed them, it would be "Action to take when a moderated member posts to the list. "
370 2015-06-21 22:44:04 <warren> yeah, set it to reject and write a message for both options.
371 2015-06-21 22:44:07 <sipa> got it
372 2015-06-21 22:45:21 <sipa> i think it is pretty vanilla
373 2015-06-21 22:45:39 <sipa> can someone try sending a mail to the old list?
374 2015-06-21 22:46:01 <btcdrak> ok
375 2015-06-21 22:46:29 <btcdrak> sent
376 2015-06-21 22:46:31 <warren> sent
377 2015-06-21 22:46:33 <CodeShark> sent
378 2015-06-21 22:47:38 <warren> sipa: seems to be a blackhole, no reject message
379 2015-06-21 22:47:47 <warren> did you set to reject?
380 2015-06-21 22:48:37 <sipa> warren: try again
381 2015-06-21 22:50:01 <CodeShark> nothing
382 2015-06-21 22:50:36 <warren> sipa: my subscribed address got the reject with the message, the unsubscribed address was as blackhole
383 2015-06-21 22:52:03 <CodeShark> and my supposidely greylisted post to the new ML hasn't posted yet either
384 2015-06-21 22:53:02 <emsearcy> CodeShark: if you provide me your email, I can look into that
385 2015-06-21 22:53:09 <CodeShark> elombrozo@gmail.com
386 2015-06-21 22:53:10 <warren> CodeShark: do you control your own smtp server?
387 2015-06-21 22:53:14 <warren> oh
388 2015-06-21 22:53:17 <CodeShark> no, I'm using gmail
389 2015-06-21 22:54:28 <emsearcy> CodeShark: we don't greylist any google domains.  I see one message from you that went through, Jun 21 22:19:32
390 2015-06-21 22:54:43 <CodeShark> so then what gives?
391 2015-06-21 22:54:50 <sipa> what was the message?
392 2015-06-21 22:55:08 <sipa> i got a "Blah..." from you on the new list
393 2015-06-21 22:55:13 <CodeShark> yes - that's me
394 2015-06-21 22:55:20 <emsearcy> this one? http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008983.html
395 2015-06-21 22:56:13 <CodeShark> yep
396 2015-06-21 22:56:14 <warren> sipa: unsubscribed user posts to old list go into a blackhole without any reject message.
397 2015-06-21 22:56:32 <emsearcy> 14:38 < emsearcy> hey folks, I forgot to fix ownership on the archives when I imported (done now), which is why the LF pipermail isn't showing any of the test messages that have been being sent
398 2015-06-21 22:56:45 <emsearcy> CodeShark: ^ maybe you sent that message before that
399 2015-06-21 22:57:01 <CodeShark> I think my spam filter is messed up...one sec
400 2015-06-21 22:57:17 <sipa> warren: blackhole should be gone now
401 2015-06-21 22:58:06 <emsearcy> CodeShark: are you/were you expecting to receive a copy back of the message you sent?
402 2015-06-21 22:58:13 <CodeShark> ok, yeah - it got put in my spam folder
403 2015-06-21 22:58:19 <CodeShark> seems to be working now
404 2015-06-21 22:58:23 <emsearcy> great
405 2015-06-21 22:58:31 <emsearcy> (aside from stuff being put in spam...)
406 2015-06-21 22:59:33 <sipa> emsearcy: thanks!
407 2015-06-21 22:59:43 <sipa> (not for heading out, but for helping out)
408 2015-06-21 22:59:56 <warren> sipa: still seems to be a blackhole
409 2015-06-21 23:00:03 <sipa> pfft
410 2015-06-21 23:00:17 <warren> subscribed reject works fine, only unsubscribe is a problem
411 2015-06-21 23:00:26 <warren> sipa: there's two settings on that page
412 2015-06-21 23:00:38 <sipa> yes, i set the bottom one to reject
413 2015-06-21 23:00:41 <sipa> and put a reject message there
414 2015-06-21 23:03:22 <warren> sipa: 6th blackhole again from unsubscribed ... I don't know what's going on.
415 2015-06-21 23:03:40 <warren> lots of people may not realize they were unsubscribed by accident and their post will go nowhere
416 2015-06-21 23:15:09 <btcdrak> sipa: do you have access to the list of subscribers?
417 2015-06-21 23:15:40 <btcdrak> sipa: you could always send a manual email to everyone in BCC let them know it's moved
418 2015-06-21 23:38:40 <Luke-Jr> can we stop the test emails now that the ML is live? :/