1 2015-06-24 04:51:51 <theymos> There seemed to be some support for restricting alerts to a set of codes rather than allowing arbitrary text (this seems good to me), so I made a very rough draft of the necessary codes and their associated warning text, just to start discussion: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Theymos/Alert_codes
  2 2015-06-24 05:03:03 <zooko> theymos: very good!
  3 2015-06-24 05:03:51 <Luke-Jr> theymos: I don't think we should try to predict every possible failure mode
  4 2015-06-24 05:03:59 <Luke-Jr> it's bad enough that we can't scope by platform etc
  5 2015-06-24 05:05:04 <Luke-Jr> theymos: also, I would say SHA256 breaking is a much bigger problem than ECDSA breaking (which should be mostly harmless if people stop sending bitcoins when it happens)
  6 2015-06-24 05:06:21 <Luke-Jr> "A change is legitimate if it is supported by the vast majority of the Bitcoin economy" <-- "vast majority" does not seem to convey the needs of consensus
  7 2015-06-24 05:06:46 <Luke-Jr> maybe "A change is legitimate if it has near unanimous support from the Bitcoin economy…"?
  8 2015-06-24 05:07:19 <theymos> Luke-Jr: I feel like most potential problems will be more-or-less covered by these codes. You do lose some specificity, but using fixed codes like this reduces the power of the alert key, improving decentralization and preventing potential disasters like the alert key being compromised and used to push malware.
  9 2015-06-24 05:07:34 <theymos> I'll change that. Feel free to edit the page, as well.
 10 2015-06-24 05:07:49 <Luke-Jr> ok
 11 2015-06-24 05:07:49 <prestotron> Luke-Jr, theymos does have a point :P
 12 2015-06-24 05:09:47 <theymos> Luke-Jr: I think unless RIPEMD-160 is also broken, I think that a SHA-256 break is recoverable by locking in the best-known-good block chain state and then requiring people to sign using ECDSA + a different hash algorithm.
 13 2015-06-24 05:10:36 <Luke-Jr> theymos: blocks themselves are secured only by SHA256
 14 2015-06-24 05:10:48 <phantomcircuit> theymos, that depends on what the break is
 15 2015-06-24 05:11:06 <zooko> theymos: FWIW, I don't necessarily agree with "A change is legitimate if it has virtually unanimous support from the entire Bitcoin economy and you personally believe that it is in accordance with the spirit of Bitcoin.".
 16 2015-06-24 05:11:20 <zooko> That seems to be more of a philosophical or political position than a technical fact.
 17 2015-06-24 05:11:35 <Luke-Jr> zooko: elaborate on how it's not a technical fact?
 18 2015-06-24 05:11:36 <theymos> Luke-Jr: yeah, but their contents are known to many independent people and can be agreed upon and manually checkpointed in the code. (Messy/centralized, but probably the best option in this scenario.)
 19 2015-06-24 05:12:17 <zooko> Luke-Jr: it's… just… not?
 20 2015-06-24 05:12:48 <Luke-Jr> …
 21 2015-06-24 05:13:19 <theymos> I suppose it's not exactly technical, but it reflects how Bitcoin should work and what users should do...
 22 2015-06-24 05:13:22 <zooko> Luke-Jr: I don't think "legitimacy", what sort of political support a change has, or one's beliefs in something's alignment with the spirit of bitcoin are technical facts.
 23 2015-06-24 05:13:39 <zooko> theymos: that's your opinion. It is a fine opinion! But not everyone shares it.
 24 2015-06-24 05:14:02 <wumpus> BlueMatt: oh
 25 2015-06-24 05:14:32 <Luke-Jr> zooko: it's technical fact that unless everyone enforces the same rules, none of this works together; it's also a technical fact that economic majority is what matters in terms of forcing others to comply
 26 2015-06-24 05:17:52 <wumpus> BlueMatt: I see I forgot to post mine, and let's try to collect posthumous acks, it's not like https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6088 is controversial or causing issues so I see no immediate need to revert it
 27 2015-06-24 05:19:50 <zooko> Luke-Jr: I don't think either of those are facts.
 28 2015-06-24 05:19:59 <zooko> Luke-Jr: which doesn't mean I think they are bad opinions.
 29 2015-06-24 05:20:10 <Luke-Jr> …
 30 2015-06-24 05:30:53 <michagogo> The onomatopoeic one
 31 2015-06-24 05:34:07 <agorecki> how are the bankers flocking to bitcoin? alex jones channel on youtube has a video about it, but I don't have a set of headphones I can use so can't listen to it
 32 2015-06-24 05:34:14 <agorecki> only could read description
 33 2015-06-24 05:34:52 <Luke-Jr> agorecki: off-topic, please take it to #bitcoin
 34 2015-06-24 05:35:08 <agorecki> k
 35 2015-06-24 05:35:50 <wumpus> I had to look that one up michagogo :)
 36 2015-06-24 05:36:17 <wumpus> agorecki: the bankers are flocking to bitcoin, I hear their flapping wings every night
 37 2015-06-24 05:36:59 <agorecki> what does that do to bitcoins in terms of being a threat to it?
 38 2015-06-24 05:37:03 <agorecki> bitcoin*
 39 2015-06-24 05:37:44 <wumpus> eh let's heed Luke-Jr's suggestion
 40 2015-06-24 05:39:38 <agorecki> threat mitigation is a development issue afiaac. will wait and see what the bankers do I suppose. I'm sure it will come up on the mailing list at some point
 41 2015-06-24 05:40:08 <agorecki> afaiac*
 42 2015-06-24 05:41:12 <michagogo> wumpus: heh
 43 2015-06-24 06:50:45 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: sorry, more problems with Pulse found :<
 44 2015-06-24 06:51:23 <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: go ahead. But mind, it's a PoC and totally unfinished.
 45 2015-06-24 06:51:42 <Luke-Jr> go ahead with what? XD
 46 2015-06-24 06:51:55 <jonasschnelli> But any kind of feedback is welcome. (go ahead with reporting issues).
 47 2015-06-24 06:52:15 <Luke-Jr> just left a long one
 48 2015-06-24 06:52:37 <jonasschnelli> ah. Yeah. theres a big mail in my inbox. right. :)
 49 2015-06-24 06:53:39 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: was planning to include it in my 0.11-ljr branch/release, but the hanging is scary
 50 2015-06-24 06:53:53 <Luke-Jr> I guess it only starts doing stuff once the window is opened?
 51 2015-06-24 06:55:42 <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: don't include it. Its really unfinished!
 52 2015-06-24 06:56:22 <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: it has out-commented code, it probably has leaks and all kind of ugly stuff. It's really for conceptual review...
 53 2015-06-24 06:56:43 <jonasschnelli> But it seems to be popular and i'll continue it soon.
 54 2015-06-24 06:57:02 <Luke-Jr> k
 55 2015-06-24 06:57:53 <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: once it's stable, you could replace the font for your 0.11-ljr branch. But people will start to miss the cool font. :)
 56 2015-06-24 07:02:48 <wumpus> https://github.com/laanwj/bitcoin-submittx added SOCKS5 support, it should be on-par with Bitcoin Core's own transaction submission now
 57 2015-06-24 07:03:47 <Luke-Jr> wumpus: neat
 58 2015-06-24 07:14:37 <Luke-Jr> fwiw, I have a Perl script that gets most of the conversions from UniValue to json_spirit right
 59 2015-06-24 07:17:09 <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: are there really much difference between two json output of the twos? I was hoping the last thing where the \/?
 60 2015-06-24 07:17:32 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: dunno, I just needed that for backporting PRs to 0.11 :p
 61 2015-06-24 07:17:37 <wumpus> Luke-Jr: any bugs left (except the 1e-2 parsing thing)
 62 2015-06-24 07:17:53 <wumpus> Luke-Jr: ohhh you mean porting code
 63 2015-06-24 07:17:55 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: does your comment on 5916 mean you won't be addressing it?
 64 2015-06-24 07:18:01 <Luke-Jr> wumpus: yes, I'm Perling the C++ :P
 65 2015-06-24 07:18:15 <Luke-Jr> and I didn't try it on whole files yet, just diffs <.<
 66 2015-06-24 07:18:25 <jonasschnelli> wumpus: yesterday we found out that the univalue_escapes.h line 39 is not necessary.
 67 2015-06-24 07:18:31 <jonasschnelli> escaping of /
 68 2015-06-24 07:19:31 <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: #5916: i can, it's a matter of seconds. But adding a new wallet version for this looks after a overkill?
 69 2015-06-24 07:19:47 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: I think it's redundant, yes (although if you fix it, please refer to the standard, it must be defined somewhere what to escape, and this errs on the safe side)
 70 2015-06-24 07:20:12 <btcdrak> wumpus: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6124
 71 2015-06-24 07:20:15 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: dunno, seems nicer considering wallet
 72 2015-06-24 07:21:39 <wumpus> btcdrak: yes
 73 2015-06-24 07:22:01 <btcdrak> I have been thinking about adding a fee bumping widget to the UI assuming FSS-RBF is merged, but I wanted to know what others feel about it, and what the feature should look like. I expect there is some complexity
 74 2015-06-24 07:22:40 <btcdrak> wumpus: that PR is well tested and has lots of PRs. Wondering if you can consider merging it.
 75 2015-06-24 07:22:52 <btcdrak> lol, i mean "lots of *ACKs"
 76 2015-06-24 07:23:02 <jonasschnelli> wumpus: right. I was looking for the escaping standards. If i fix it i will refer.
 77 2015-06-24 07:23:13 <wumpus> btcdrak: agreed
 78 2015-06-24 07:23:19 <Luke-Jr> btcdrak: even without RBF, that's a useful feature
 79 2015-06-24 07:23:55 <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: do you add the ban PRs to your 0.11-ljr?
 80 2015-06-24 07:24:17 <wumpus> btcdrak: yes, sounds like a useful feature
 81 2015-06-24 07:24:30 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: yes, those were a pain :P
 82 2015-06-24 07:24:51 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: next RC, I think I will try to reorder them better
 83 2015-06-24 07:25:10 <btcdrak> Luke-Jr: well yes. I'm just unclear about how the feature should actually be implemented in the UI. On the face of it, you should be able to select an unconfirmed transaction and fill a form with a different fee. It would adjust the change address output (assuming we can determine what the change output is).
 84 2015-06-24 07:25:13 <wumpus> btw we really need to do a hardcoded seed nodes update for next 0.11 rc
 85 2015-06-24 07:25:47 <jonasschnelli> wumpus: Agreed. I think sipa did that last time.
 86 2015-06-24 07:26:06 <Luke-Jr> btcdrak: as a user, my ideal would be to set a fee policy when I first send it, and have the wallet handle it automatically behind the scenes
 87 2015-06-24 07:26:25 <Luke-Jr> btcdrak: for encrypted wallets, this may mean signing N variants upfront, and delaying broadcasting
 88 2015-06-24 07:27:04 <wumpus> there's also a slight inconsistency in the dev scripts, I added share/seeds, while there is also a contrib/seeds directory with other scripts, this is slightly confusing (and my own fault :-)
 89 2015-06-24 07:28:49 <jonasschnelli> for a full node wallet, why not having a extra ui element for unconfirmed transaction, show how long they dangle in the confonf-space. Users can click and add fee. Also there should be a column where you see the feerate and the recommended feerate for getting mined within the next and/or the next 6 blocks.
 90 2015-06-24 07:29:10 <Luke-Jr> btcdrak: that being said, a manual bump-fee is still better than nothing, and in any case necessary for *incoming* txs
 91 2015-06-24 07:29:33 <jonasschnelli> Maybe also a column with the estimate, when (how many blocks it might take / ~mins.) your tx probably get mined.
 92 2015-06-24 07:29:40 <wumpus> yes, manual-anything is better than nothing, implementing automatic policy will be a step further
 93 2015-06-24 07:30:28 <jonasschnelli> automatic policy if for merchants IMO. Could also be a risk in situations like we had during the stress tests.
 94 2015-06-24 07:31:00 <Luke-Jr> automatic can wait until the 1MB-is-full crunch :P
 95 2015-06-24 07:31:19 <wumpus> right
 96 2015-06-24 07:40:55 <btcdrak> Is there a way for the wallet to know itself which is the change address (given we randomise the position of the change address output)?
 97 2015-06-24 07:41:30 <Luke-Jr> btcdrak: it already knows - it's hidden in the GUI :p
 98 2015-06-24 07:41:35 <jonasschnelli> btcdrak: by looking up the address book
 99 2015-06-24 07:41:44 <Luke-Jr> also note for RBF-FSS, I think you need to not decrease change either
100 2015-06-24 07:54:31 <leakypat> for FSS you need to add input or input and second change output
101 2015-06-24 07:55:17 <btcdrak> Luke-Jr: leakypat: thanks.
102 2015-06-24 07:55:25 <leakypat> Thereby increasing the size of the tran and further adding to the fee
103 2015-06-24 07:55:51 <leakypat> Non FSS much nicer :)
104 2015-06-24 07:55:54 <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: upgraded https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5916 to use wallet upgrade
105 2015-06-24 07:56:00 <moa> mixing FSS with FFS is easy
106 2015-06-24 07:57:07 <btcdrak> so the question now is how to handle the UI, since we're technically making a new transaction, the UI will now list two transactions. One of those wont confirm. I suppose we need to remove the unconfirmed one from the UI after the other confirms, which means we need to track the status of both txs until there is a confirmation. how would you handle this?
107 2015-06-24 07:57:53 <btcdrak> ... and assume the originally confirmed transaction isnt orphaned by a competing block which confirmed the other tx.
108 2015-06-24 08:07:33 <Luke-Jr> btcdrak: are you saying the UI is *still* broken for malleability? :|
109 2015-06-24 08:07:45 <Luke-Jr> if not, then this should be the same case
110 2015-06-24 08:10:59 <btcdrak> Luke-Jr: I dont know, I'm just trying to think out loud to plan ahead and not get caught up in an unexpected quagmire
111 2015-06-24 08:55:46 <leakypat> btcdrak: I'm working on a similar thing at the moment
112 2015-06-24 08:57:38 <leakypat> I'm also mulling how to display it , my initial thought is to display a sub status off the original transaction
113 2015-06-24 09:00:02 <leakypat> Then when a confirmation arrives for whichever one it becomes the only transaction displayed, with some record of what happened if the user wants to drill down
114 2015-06-24 09:07:55 <rubensayshi> hmm, smt odd on testnet, many nodes stuck on #484626 for the past 2 hrs
115 2015-06-24 09:08:08 <rubensayshi> 2015-06-24 09:07:02 ERROR: ContextualCheckBlockHeader : rejected nVersion=2 block
116 2015-06-24 09:08:08 <rubensayshi> 2015-06-24 09:07:02 ERROR: invalid header received
117 2015-06-24 09:08:08 <rubensayshi> the only nodes that are not stuck, when trying to get headers from them I get;
118 2015-06-24 09:08:51 <Luke-Jr> rubensayshi: why do you assume you're stuck, and not them forked off?
119 2015-06-24 09:09:06 <rubensayshi> because there hasnt been a block for 2hrs
120 2015-06-24 09:09:17 <rubensayshi> and there's a lot of other nodes also at this height
121 2015-06-24 09:09:35 <rubensayshi> I'd asume at least someone would be mining on my side of the fork?
122 2015-06-24 09:09:41 <rubensayshi> guess I'll gen=1 :P
123 2015-06-24 09:10:56 <btcdrak> leakypat: that's good to know: if you're doing to be doing the fee bumping UI feature I wont start on anything.
124 2015-06-24 09:13:25 <leakypat> btcdrak: I'm not working on qt
125 2015-06-24 09:13:46 <btcdrak> leakypat>
126 2015-06-24 09:13:49 <leakypat> On a different wallet, just similar problem
127 2015-06-24 09:13:51 <btcdrak> leakypat: ah ok.
128 2015-06-24 09:13:58 <leakypat> Sorry if this is wrong channel
129 2015-06-24 09:14:05 <leakypat> Actually thought I was in wizards
130 2015-06-24 09:14:06 <leakypat> Haha
131 2015-06-24 09:15:14 <Luke-Jr> rubensayshi: gen=1 is pretty crappy
132 2015-06-24 09:15:33 <Luke-Jr> leakypat: no, it's fine
133 2015-06-24 09:15:46 <rubensayshi> I got some old miners around, guess I attach them to my laptop too :P
134 2015-06-24 09:15:48 <Luke-Jr> leakypat: not sure why you'd display anything unusual
135 2015-06-24 09:15:57 <Luke-Jr> rubensayshi: I just stuck my U3 on it
136 2015-06-24 09:16:03 <rubensayshi> <3
137 2015-06-24 09:16:20 <rubensayshi> you're also at #484626 right now?
138 2015-06-24 09:16:27 <Luke-Jr> yes
139 2015-06-24 09:16:45 <leakypat> Yeah, perhaps no need, I mean if the user has bumped the fee, there might need to be some status letting them know if was submitted
140 2015-06-24 09:16:57 <jouke> rubensayshi: I'm at 484633
141 2015-06-24 09:17:04 <jouke> But it is a 0.9 node
142 2015-06-24 09:17:12 <rubensayshi> hmm
143 2015-06-24 09:17:17 <rubensayshi> I'm 0.10
144 2015-06-24 09:17:31 <jouke> "errors" : "Warning: The network does not appear to fully agree! Some miners appear to be experiencing issues."
145 2015-06-24 09:18:12 <rubensayshi> https://gist.github.com/rubensayshi/e6bd633c06f6f47d6a34
146 2015-06-24 09:18:20 <rubensayshi> its a split between <=0.9 and >=0.10
147 2015-06-24 09:19:08 <Luke-Jr> rubensayshi: to be expected
148 2015-06-24 09:19:18 <Luke-Jr> 0.10 has a softwork
149 2015-06-24 09:19:20 <Luke-Jr> softfork*
150 2015-06-24 09:19:24 <rubensayshi> strict der?
151 2015-06-24 09:19:55 <wumpus> try upgrading to 0.9.5
152 2015-06-24 09:20:39 <Luke-Jr> rubensayshi: yes
153 2015-06-24 09:20:47 <rubensayshi> wumpus, I'm on 0.10
154 2015-06-24 09:20:58 <rubensayshi> but there aren't any miners on testnet that are on 0.10 it seems xD
155 2015-06-24 09:21:00 <Diablo-D3> so did bfl ever ship that hardware
156 2015-06-24 09:21:00 <wumpus> oh, that's good then
157 2015-06-24 09:21:05 <Diablo-D3> or are people still waiting for their shit/
158 2015-06-24 09:21:08 <jouke> I have more old nodes then new nodes
159 2015-06-24 09:21:17 <Luke-Jr> Diablo-D3: afaik BFL caught up months ago
160 2015-06-24 09:21:30 <Diablo-D3> ahh
161 2015-06-24 09:21:33 <Diablo-D3> too bad its a scam
162 2015-06-24 09:21:34 <Diablo-D3> oh well
163 2015-06-24 09:21:35 <jouke> *I am connected to
164 2015-06-24 09:21:48 <Luke-Jr> wumpus: it's strange that testnet got past the v3 threshold without miners on the v3 fork
165 2015-06-24 09:21:56 <rubensayshi> so unless some of these miners upgrade we're gonna have a huge testnet fork :P ?
166 2015-06-24 09:22:04 <rubensayshi> Luke-Jr, there's a lot of ppl turning stuff on and off
167 2015-06-24 09:22:09 <michagogo> ירצ
168 2015-06-24 09:22:10 <michagogo> hrm
169 2015-06-24 09:22:15 <Luke-Jr> michagogo: RTL?
170 2015-06-24 09:22:49 <michagogo> with a version-bumping softfork, can the locking in be reversed by a reorg?
171 2015-06-24 09:22:59 <michagogo> Luke-Jr: yeah, had the Hebrew keyboard layout activated
172 2015-06-24 09:27:55 <Luke-Jr> michagogo: not every day the timestamp and nick move to the right side of my screen :P
173 2015-06-24 09:28:04 <michagogo> Luke-Jr: heh
174 2015-06-24 09:28:33 <leakypat> Luke-Jr: you are saying it should be displayed as 2 separate transactions with one remaining unconfirmed?
175 2015-06-24 09:28:44 <Luke-Jr> leakypat: no, just one ever.
176 2015-06-24 09:28:55 <Luke-Jr> leakypat: just because you change the fee, doesn't make it a separate transaction
177 2015-06-24 09:32:40 <leakypat> But there are now two tx for the one financial transaction
178 2015-06-24 09:32:51 <leakypat> Either of which could confirm
179 2015-06-24 09:33:48 <Luke-Jr> leakypat: so?
180 2015-06-24 09:33:57 <Luke-Jr> there was already unlimited potentially
181 2015-06-24 09:34:00 <Luke-Jr> thanks to malleability
182 2015-06-24 09:34:21 <Luke-Jr> txid shouldn't be exposed to end users any more than necessary
183 2015-06-24 09:35:02 <paveljanik> testnet testing PartitionCheck right now
184 2015-06-24 09:36:17 <leakypat> Luke-Jr: but they will likely want to grab the Id and look in a block explorer for a second opinion to check the status and also they will be used to double clicking and getting a tx id
185 2015-06-24 09:36:57 <Luke-Jr> lol, you have weird users? <.<
186 2015-06-24 09:37:22 <Luke-Jr> anyhow, once it confirms the txid is final
187 2015-06-24 09:41:42 <btcdrak> michagogo: partial self-dox :-P
188 2015-06-24 09:44:08 <btcdrak> Luke-Jr: assuming it isnt orphaned by competing block with the other tx
189 2015-06-24 09:44:32 <Luke-Jr> btcdrak: by confirmed, I mean the full 6 blocks :P
190 2015-06-24 09:45:40 <btcdrak> problem is, even with txid normalisation, adding an input will change that too, seems like txid should just be a random number and not deterministic at all
191 2015-06-24 09:46:09 <Luke-Jr> who said anything about "txid normalisation"?
192 2015-06-24 09:46:24 <Luke-Jr> the only constant is the scriptPubKey :P
193 2015-06-24 09:59:08 <michagogo> btcdrak: huh?
194 2015-06-24 09:59:34 <michagogo> The fact that I have the Hebrew keyboard layout as an option?
195 2015-06-24 10:03:28 <btcdrak> michagogo: it's all metadata, hehe
196 2015-06-24 10:04:09 <Luke-Jr> btcdrak: it's kinda well-known where michagogo lives
197 2015-06-24 10:06:46 <StormDev> btcdrak, for me sha(sha( header ) ) = txid is equivalent to a random function
198 2015-06-24 11:11:59 <em1997> hi quick question. If I use my own client-side wallet (and not a server based app like coinbase) to send 1 btc, is there a small charge? from the miners?
199 2015-06-24 11:12:17 <em1997> or is 1btc before exactly equal to 1btc after
200 2015-06-24 11:12:40 <jonasschnelli> em1997: #bitcoin please (this is the devs channel)
201 2015-06-24 11:12:49 <em1997> ah, ok thanks!
202 2015-06-24 14:44:36 <helo> were there any problems to speak of resulting from the "load test"?
203 2015-06-24 14:46:46 <hearn> users complained
204 2015-06-24 14:46:49 <hearn> as far as i'm aware, that's it
205 2015-06-24 14:46:58 <hearn> presumably higher double spending risk during the time period as well
206 2015-06-24 14:55:00 <leakypat> Not really, some delays, I could get confirmations with a decent fee
207 2015-06-24 14:55:28 <leakypat> Some infrastructure fell over, bc.info and bitpay insight
208 2015-06-24 17:23:53 <jtimon> Luke-Jr cfields petertodd morcos wumpus sipa please let's not delay https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6335 further
209 2015-06-24 17:58:37 <C-Otto> jtimon: that basically is a refactoring, helping with customization/merging other policies?
210 2015-06-24 17:59:55 <jtimon> yes, it helps both encapsulating the standard policy code as well as making it easier to maintain alternative policies
211 2015-06-24 18:00:09 <C-Otto> cool.
212 2015-06-24 18:02:41 <jtimon> C-Otto eventually  rbf, cpfp, cpfp-rpf, safe-rpf, etc should be selectable with a command line option, but we're still away from that (specially if we never do the first code movements)
213 2015-06-24 18:27:12 <Luke-Jr> jtimon: annoyingly, policy/fees.cpp is not policy code, so I'm not sure policy/policy.cpp is a good place for this
214 2015-06-24 18:27:43 <jtimon> policy/fees is policy code, so far only the estimator
215 2015-06-24 18:28:13 <Luke-Jr> it
216 2015-06-24 18:28:19 <jtimon> depends on minRelayTxFee, it is policy code
217 2015-06-24 18:28:19 <Luke-Jr> it's code to analyse the policy of others
218 2015-06-24 18:29:17 <Luke-Jr> depending on policy does not make something policy code :p
219 2015-06-24 18:29:20 <jtimon> anyway, "code to analyse the policy of others" is still more policy than most other things
220 2015-06-24 18:30:40 <jtimon> I don't want to discuss a clear rule for what is and what is not policy code right now, but if you have to use the word policy to describe it I think it qualifies as policy code "code to analyse the policy of others"
221 2015-06-24 18:32:33 <jtimon> policy code: blah blah, including code to blah the policy of others"
222 2015-06-24 18:32:40 <sdaftuar> seems pretty clear to me that users should be able to run whatever fee estimator they want
223 2015-06-24 18:32:58 <sdaftuar> (so i agree with jtimon)
224 2015-06-24 20:14:48 <jonasschnelli> If someone is interested to help specify the new wallet, here's a git with some specs and ideas. Feedback or ideas are welcome: https://gist.github.com/jonasschnelli/4af3c1c196227e581d79
225 2015-06-24 20:15:49 <jonasschnelli> (currently I try to redact my bad english)
226 2015-06-24 20:18:23 <C-Otto> jonasschnelli: using a spell checker would be a good start
227 2015-06-24 20:18:53 <jonasschnelli> C-Otto: :) Yeah. Will do within the next mins.
228 2015-06-24 20:39:55 <ajweiss> jonasschnelli: "The RPC interface is not capable to accomplish a such usecase because of the known limitation of HTTP."?
229 2015-06-24 20:40:59 <CodeShark> jonasschnelli: no mention of mSIGNA!
230 2015-06-24 20:41:01 <CodeShark> wtf
231 2015-06-24 20:41:04 <jonasschnelli> ajweiss: do you think it's capable?
232 2015-06-24 20:41:52 <ajweiss> i don't see why not... zmq has some nice features though...
233 2015-06-24 20:42:19 <CodeShark> jonasschnelli: I already disapprove on the grounds that you've completely failed to acknowledge the best wallet in this space!
234 2015-06-24 20:42:21 <CodeShark> :p
235 2015-06-24 20:43:45 <CodeShark> fwiw, I started working on mSIGNA after realizing this would never get merged: https://github.com/CodeShark/bitcoin/tree/multiwallet-qt
236 2015-06-24 20:44:13 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: except it would, had you continued working on it..
237 2015-06-24 20:44:44 <jonasschnelli> CodeShark: Yeah. I tried mSIGNA. Code is probably really good. But you have to work on the UI. :)
238 2015-06-24 20:46:47 <jonasschnelli> ajweiss: Yes. Your probably right. RPC would also be capable to separate processes, though, i'd like a solution where HTTP is not involved (overhead, limitations)
239 2015-06-24 20:47:00 <CodeShark> jonasschnelli: you say we need work on U
240 2015-06-24 20:47:07 <CodeShark> on UI yet you mention Armory??!!
241 2015-06-24 20:47:10 <CodeShark> lol
242 2015-06-24 20:47:29 <CodeShark> I guess it's better to not be mentioned in that context
243 2015-06-24 20:47:43 <CodeShark> so thanks for the omission :)
244 2015-06-24 20:48:41 <ajweiss> jonasschnelli: what would be really cool would be if a nice interface for building wallets that depend on a trusted fullnode for security came out of this
245 2015-06-24 20:48:57 <CodeShark> anyhow, if you want to help with UI, please do so - we can discuss compensation offline :)
246 2015-06-24 20:49:09 <jonasschnelli> CodeShark: really no offense. I really haven tested mSIGNA in detail. I don't want to judge other wallets.
247 2015-06-24 20:52:40 <ajweiss> right now it seems that wallet options are: trusted 3rd party infrastructure, spv, glued to fullnode (like armory) and then the fullnode core wallet
248 2015-06-24 20:53:11 <CodeShark> mSIGNA allows you the option to connect to any node
249 2015-06-24 20:53:21 <CodeShark> it can do SPV, it can connect to full node
250 2015-06-24 20:53:34 <CodeShark> it only uses p2p protocol
251 2015-06-24 20:53:36 <CodeShark> no RPC
252 2015-06-24 20:54:13 <ajweiss> does it validate?
253 2015-06-24 20:54:24 <CodeShark> it does SPV validation...but I don't trust SPV myself ;)
254 2015-06-24 20:54:35 <CodeShark> so I run a full node that I connect it to
255 2015-06-24 20:54:57 <CodeShark> as opposed to Armory, though, it's not glued to a particular full node
256 2015-06-24 20:54:59 <ajweiss> then it takes blocks from that fullnode as valid on face value?
257 2015-06-24 20:55:03 <CodeShark> you can connect it to ANY full node
258 2015-06-24 20:55:09 <CodeShark> and you can switch that setting at any time
259 2015-06-24 20:55:23 <CodeShark> you can share a single full node between multiple instances on many machines
260 2015-06-24 20:56:01 <CodeShark> it checks PoW, ajweiss
261 2015-06-24 20:56:17 <CodeShark> but  it does not check all the txs in a block
262 2015-06-24 20:56:43 <ajweiss> that's pretty cool
263 2015-06-24 20:57:56 <ajweiss> i was playing with wallets a few weeks ago and it looked good... but it had some weird dependency
264 2015-06-24 20:58:11 <CodeShark> which one?
265 2015-06-24 20:58:21 <ajweiss> some object database thinger
266 2015-06-24 20:58:27 <CodeShark> oh, odb
267 2015-06-24 20:59:29 <CodeShark> odb makes it possible to hook it up to multiple SQL backends, though :)
268 2015-06-24 20:59:35 <CodeShark> with no change to the source code
269 2015-06-24 21:00:25 <CodeShark> for the desktop GUI I use sqlite, for servers I can use posgresql or mysql
270 2015-06-24 21:01:31 <CodeShark> or oracle or ms sql
271 2015-06-24 21:01:45 <ajweiss> it looked like a neat tool, but it wasn't in the standard package repos and i remember coming across some scary long licensing page... i was kinda scared off
272 2015-06-24 21:02:41 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: so does QtSql?
273 2015-06-24 21:03:39 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: perhaps - I haven't used QtSql. ODB is also an object relational mapper, though
274 2015-06-24 21:05:21 <CodeShark> it's a compiler that takes C++ classes and maps them to SQL tables
275 2015-06-24 21:05:50 <leakypat> jonasschnelli: the spec looks good, I think the spv mode while it syncs in the background is a good idea
276 2015-06-24 21:07:53 <leakypat> jonasschnelli: will it force the user to encrypt the files? currently it is optional I think
277 2015-06-24 21:10:43 <CodeShark> ajweiss: why did the license scare you? :)
278 2015-06-24 21:11:25 <CodeShark> it's GPLv2
279 2015-06-24 21:11:52 <CodeShark> CPL and FPL
280 2015-06-24 21:12:07 <ajweiss> it was the lack of a package, and then finding a page for a commercial concern that really did it
281 2015-06-24 21:12:08 <CodeShark> triple licensed
282 2015-06-24 21:12:48 <CodeShark> the commercial licensing is only if you don't want to be bound by GPLv2
283 2015-06-24 21:12:56 <ajweiss> it might be fine, but usually those are warning signs that something is liable to track mud all over the carpet
284 2015-06-24 21:15:19 <CodeShark> it would be nice for there to be a standard package, I agree
285 2015-06-24 21:16:22 <CodeShark> I am not sure that the lack of a standard package is really due to any legal concerns, though - it seems like it's a small company and they haven't really put much effort into these packages
286 2015-06-24 21:16:41 <CodeShark> for instance, I think the Qt license is at least as restrictive
287 2015-06-24 21:17:05 <Luke-Jr> didn't Nokia make it LGPL?
288 2015-06-24 21:17:13 <ajweiss> the issue for me is that i really don't like "make install" for installing libraries
289 2015-06-24 21:17:28 <Luke-Jr> also, in the event of Qt maintenance stopping, it automatically goes BSDL :P
290 2015-06-24 21:18:09 <ajweiss> memory is coming back now... i stopped when i saw "linux-build-environment" and it had a bunch of "make install"s
291 2015-06-24 21:18:34 <CodeShark> hehe - you can also use the binary distributions provided on the ODB website :)
292 2015-06-24 21:18:51 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: so when are you going to rebase multiwallet-qt? :p
293 2015-06-24 21:18:58 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: hahaha
294 2015-06-24 21:21:05 <CodeShark> this one got merged: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/67155d9299ef75cc73272a259dbfbf72632c3020
295 2015-06-24 21:21:18 <ajweiss> maybe i'm just dated and everybody uses images/vms for building stuff now anyway
296 2015-06-24 21:21:44 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: which just goes to show "would never be merged" is FUD :|
297 2015-06-24 21:22:03 <Luke-Jr> ajweiss: I don't. Probably the dependency is why I haven't tried mSIGNA lately ;)
298 2015-06-24 21:22:38 <ajweiss> no ebuild for odb either?
299 2015-06-24 21:22:57 <Luke-Jr> ajweiss: not afaik; lots of search results for "odb", but not sure any of them are the same
300 2015-06-24 21:24:20 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: 67155d was just scaffolding :p
301 2015-06-24 21:24:21 <Luke-Jr> https://bpaste.net/show/705d5a4c48c9
302 2015-06-24 21:24:34 <CodeShark> it lacked any of the functionality itself
303 2015-06-24 21:24:34 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: pls.
304 2015-06-24 21:24:56 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: what dev objects to multiwallet support?
305 2015-06-24 21:26:14 <CodeShark> ok ok you're right...the real reason I stopped working on it wasn't because it would never get merged...but because I really started to dislike the close coupling of the validation/relay engine with any sort of wallet functionality
306 2015-06-24 21:26:38 <Luke-Jr> ok :p
307 2015-06-24 21:33:34 <CodeShark> if I were to write a script that handles the ODB building automatically would you guys be more likely to try it out? :)
308 2015-06-24 21:34:47 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: less :P
309 2015-06-24 21:34:53 <CodeShark> haha
310 2015-06-24 21:37:57 <ajweiss> build instructions with no "sudo make install" or "sudo dpkg -i some.junk.off.the.internet.deb" would work for me
311 2015-06-24 21:39:19 <pigeons> wget -O - | sudo sh ;P
312 2015-06-24 21:39:24 <CodeShark> you shouldn't have to sudo make install unless you want to install it systemwide
313 2015-06-24 21:39:47 <K1773R> pigeons: are you mad?!
314 2015-06-24 21:39:47 <pigeons> i saw instructions recently (meteor web framework) telling you to do exactly that
315 2015-06-24 21:39:52 <CodeShark> lol
316 2015-06-24 21:39:53 <pigeons> yes mad
317 2015-06-24 21:40:17 <ajweiss> but then do i have to tweak the mSIGNA build system to find it?
318 2015-06-24 21:40:20 <pigeons> over http too
319 2015-06-24 21:41:38 <K1773R> mad pigeons... now that's tasty bacon :)
320 2015-06-24 21:41:57 <CodeShark> ajweiss: what you're installing is the odb compiler and two .a files
321 2015-06-24 21:42:31 <CodeShark> in the worst of cases we could just add the odb to the path and add the .a files to the libpath
322 2015-06-24 21:43:07 <CodeShark> or two .so files
323 2015-06-24 21:43:23 <CodeShark> or three, rather
324 2015-06-24 21:43:45 <CodeShark> libcutl.so, libodb.so, libodb-sqlite.so
325 2015-06-24 21:44:05 <CodeShark> and the odb command line tool
326 2015-06-24 21:44:14 <CodeShark> that's all sudo make install really does :)
327 2015-06-24 21:44:20 <Luke-Jr> layman -o 'https://git.btbn.de/gitweb/odb-overlay.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/layman-odb.xml' -f -a odb
328 2015-06-24 21:45:01 <ajweiss> sure, but my enthusiasm for trying it out was washed out by the potentially fruitless time investment that would have been needed to figure out how to make the build system happy
329 2015-06-24 21:45:17 <CodeShark> what distro are you using?
330 2015-06-24 21:45:54 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: you don't need the odb qt stuff?
331 2015-06-24 21:46:06 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: no
332 2015-06-24 21:46:09 <Luke-Jr> how about boost?
333 2015-06-24 21:46:20 <CodeShark> you need Qt and boost - but Qt doesn't touch anything outside the UI
334 2015-06-24 21:46:21 <ajweiss> just vanilla ubuntu on this host
335 2015-06-24 21:46:28 <Luke-Jr> odb/boost I mean
336 2015-06-24 21:46:38 <Luke-Jr> libcutl has a boost build option
337 2015-06-24 21:46:56 <CodeShark> yes, if you want to be able to use boost classes
338 2015-06-24 21:47:04 <CodeShark> but I'm only using std classes - it does require C++11
339 2015-06-24 21:47:17 <Luke-Jr> i c
340 2015-06-24 21:48:17 <CodeShark> ajweiss: as long as it's 14.04 or above there shouldn't be anything out of the ordinary at all
341 2015-06-24 21:48:21 <CodeShark> it should build just fine
342 2015-06-24 21:48:39 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: no tag for v0.9.5?
343 2015-06-24 21:48:40 <ajweiss> it needs the extra 32 bits so it can map all your key objects onto the internet :)
344 2015-06-24 21:49:37 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: 0.9.5 binaries aren't released on the website yet
345 2015-06-24 21:49:38 <Luke-Jr> no autotools? :|
346 2015-06-24 21:49:46 <CodeShark> no, no autotools :p
347 2015-06-24 21:50:09 <CodeShark> if you want to help set up an autotools build I'd be willing to pay some for that
348 2015-06-24 21:50:14 <CodeShark> but I don't have time for that :p
349 2015-06-24 21:50:50 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: how to pass -j4?
350 2015-06-24 21:51:10 <CodeShark> just like that :)
351 2015-06-24 21:51:37 <Luke-Jr> build fail
352 2015-06-24 21:51:44 <CodeShark> error?
353 2015-06-24 21:51:52 <Luke-Jr> sysroot/include/CoinQ/CoinQ_exceptions.h:52:7: error: looser throw specifier for ‘virtual CoinQ::NetworkSelectorNetworkNotRecognizedException::~NetworkSelectorNetworkNotRecognizedException()’
354 2015-06-24 21:52:36 <CodeShark> argh...
355 2015-06-24 21:53:16 <Luke-Jr> also, it's not passing -std=c++11
356 2015-06-24 21:53:28 <CodeShark> for the qt build?
357 2015-06-24 21:53:35 <CodeShark> are you using qt4 or qt5?
358 2015-06-24 21:53:45 <Luke-Jr> no idea; both are installed
359 2015-06-24 21:53:49 <CodeShark> that's probably the problem
360 2015-06-24 21:53:50 <Luke-Jr> g++ -c -pipe -g -D_REENTRANT -Wall -W -Wno-unknown-pragmas -DQT_GUI -DBOOST_THREAD_USE_LIB -DBOOST_SPIRIT_THREADSAFE -DDATABASE_SQLITE -DQT_GUI_LIB -DQT_NETWORK_LIB -DQT_CORE_LIB -DQT_SHARED -I/usr/share/qt4/mkspecs/linux-g++ -I. -I/usr/include/qt4/QtCore -I/usr/include/qt4/QtNetwork -I/usr/include/qt4/QtGui -I/usr/include/qt4 -Isysroot/include -I/usr/local/include -Ibuild/debug/moc -Ibuild/debug/ui -o build/debug/obj/stylesheets.o src/
361 2015-06-24 21:53:51 <Luke-Jr> stylesheets.cpp
362 2015-06-24 21:53:56 <CodeShark> yep
363 2015-06-24 21:53:58 <CodeShark> that's the problem
364 2015-06-24 21:54:00 <CodeShark> it needs Qt5
365 2015-06-24 21:54:06 <Luke-Jr> well, I have Qt5 :p
366 2015-06-24 21:54:22 <CodeShark> try switching to qt5 and rebuilding
367 2015-06-24 21:54:26 <Luke-Jr> how?
368 2015-06-24 21:54:28 <ajweiss> i can't build odb because my gcc doesn't support plugins
369 2015-06-24 21:55:57 <CodeShark> ajweiss: are you using gcc 4.8?
370 2015-06-24 21:56:19 <ajweiss> yep 4.8.2
371 2015-06-24 21:56:49 <CodeShark> did you install gcc-4.8-plugin-dev?
372 2015-06-24 21:57:31 <ajweiss> nope!
373 2015-06-24 21:57:31 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: how do I "switch to qt5"?
374 2015-06-24 21:57:55 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: I think it's qtselect or something - it comes down to some symbolic links
375 2015-06-24 21:58:24 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: never heard of it
376 2015-06-24 21:58:41 <Luke-Jr> for Bitcoin, it's --with-gui=qt{4/5}
377 2015-06-24 22:01:03 <CodeShark> in the case of bitcoin core that switch also involves some #ifdefs, no?
378 2015-06-24 22:01:34 <Luke-Jr> not afaik
379 2015-06-24 22:02:07 <ajweiss> ok so i built all the deps, how do i tell the msigna build system how to find them
380 2015-06-24 22:02:26 <CodeShark> ajweiss: set PATH and set LIBPATH (I think)
381 2015-06-24 22:02:54 <CodeShark> or is it LD_LIBRARY_PATH
382 2015-06-24 22:04:18 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: try export QT_SELECT = <desired Qt version>
383 2015-06-24 22:04:53 <CodeShark> or perhaps qtchooser
384 2015-06-24 22:05:02 <CodeShark> https://harishnavnit.wordpress.com/2014/03/24/handling-multiple-versions-of-qt/
385 2015-06-24 22:06:28 <CodeShark> ajweiss: you also need to set the include path
386 2015-06-24 22:06:30 <cfields> QT_SELECT sets the paths for finding bins. moc/rcc/etc
387 2015-06-24 22:06:47 <Luke-Jr> aha
388 2015-06-24 22:06:59 <cfields> you're going to have to set -I and -L paths to pickup the right headers/libs
389 2015-06-24 22:07:15 <Luke-Jr> cfields: ? :|
390 2015-06-24 22:07:25 <CodeShark> cfields: isn't there a tool that symlinks automatically>?
391 2015-06-24 22:07:42 <cfields> CodeShark: are you really asking him to change his system default? :)
392 2015-06-24 22:07:43 <Luke-Jr> the libs are named differently anyway..
393 2015-06-24 22:07:59 <CodeShark> cfields: can't you change it back afterwards?
394 2015-06-24 22:08:03 <Luke-Jr> seems to just work: g++ -c -pipe -g -D_REENTRANT -std=c++0x -Wall -W -Wno-unknown-pragmas -fPIC -DQT_GUI -DBOOST_THREAD_USE_LIB -DBOOST_SPIRIT_THREADSAFE -DDATABASE_SQLITE -DQT_WIDGETS_LIB -DQT_GUI_LIB -DQT_NETWORK_LIB -DQT_CORE_LIB -I. -Isysroot/include -I/usr/local/include -isystem /usr/include/qt5 -isystem /usr/include/qt5/QtWidgets -isystem /usr/include/qt5/QtGui -isystem /usr/include/qt5/QtNetwork -isystem /usr/include/qt5/QtCore -Ibuild/
395 2015-06-24 22:08:04 <Luke-Jr> debug/moc -Ibuild/debug/ui -I/usr/lib/qt5/mkspecs/linux-g++ -o build/debug/obj/moc_setpassphrasedialog.o build/debug/moc/moc_setpassphrasedialog.cpp
396 2015-06-24 22:08:17 <CodeShark> that looks much beter, Luke-Jr :)
397 2015-06-24 22:08:47 <CodeShark> *better
398 2015-06-24 22:09:21 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: running it pops up an EULA that I'm not interested in analysing.
399 2015-06-24 22:09:24 <cfields> oh, i didn't realize it was qmake
400 2015-06-24 22:09:44 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: the EULA is just standard legalese hogwash - I'm sure you're not going to break it :p
401 2015-06-24 22:11:23 <ajweiss> /bin/bash ../libtool   --mode=install /usr/bin/install -c   odb.la '/home/adam/dev/odb/weird-dependencies/libexec/odb'
402 2015-06-24 22:11:26 <ajweiss> libtool: install: error: cannot install `odb.la' to a directory not ending in /usr/local/libexec/odb
403 2015-06-24 22:11:46 <ajweiss> odb doesn't work with --prefix, apparently
404 2015-06-24 22:11:58 <CodeShark> you don't need the .la files
405 2015-06-24 22:12:17 <ajweiss> ok, hopefully i got the rest
406 2015-06-24 22:14:19 <ajweiss> ok i'm giving up.  and not trying to be a jerk.  this actually looks like it could be really nice and it's clear that there was a ton of good work done here... this is just really fiddly.
407 2015-06-24 22:14:56 <CodeShark> but you're so close :)
408 2015-06-24 22:17:44 <CodeShark> I'd work on making an sqlite-only build that does not require odb...but unfortunately I don't have enough engineering staff at the moment :(
409 2015-06-24 22:19:38 <CodeShark> anyhow, thanks for trying anyhow, ajweiss
410 2015-06-24 22:19:44 <ajweiss> just some build instructions that don't require root would suffice
411 2015-06-24 22:20:12 <CodeShark> the only root thing that's needed is copying a few files into your include path, lib path, and bin directories
412 2015-06-24 22:20:15 <ajweiss> (beyond installing distro supplied packages, of course)
413 2015-06-24 22:20:36 <ajweiss> i'm not convinced that's true
414 2015-06-24 22:20:50 <CodeShark> and ldconfig, I suppose
415 2015-06-24 22:21:06 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: I don't do "standard legalese hogwash"
416 2015-06-24 22:21:16 <ajweiss> i built everything, and then odb.mk was looking for installed libraries in my sysroot to determine mysql or sqllite.  i then tried to build a sysroot but odb doesn't support that.
417 2015-06-24 22:21:54 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: I can translate then: you can install this on your computer, we're not responsible if you blow yourself up using it, give us credit if you share this with others
418 2015-06-24 22:22:16 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: that's not the point.
419 2015-06-24 22:22:37 <Luke-Jr> is there anything non-AGPL/MIT in this?
420 2015-06-24 22:23:22 <CodeShark> no
421 2015-06-24 22:23:30 <CodeShark> or at least not that I know of
422 2015-06-24 22:23:44 <CodeShark> lol
423 2015-06-24 22:24:16 <CodeShark> well, if you want to distribute this to others you should have the license dialog
424 2015-06-24 22:28:02 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: how do I make a backup? export vault?
425 2015-06-24 22:28:35 <CodeShark> yes
426 2015-06-24 22:28:56 <CodeShark> or just make a copy of the .vault file (while it's closed)
427 2015-06-24 22:30:19 <Luke-Jr> how do I view a past invoice?
428 2015-06-24 22:31:25 <CodeShark> you can look at the addresses
429 2015-06-24 22:31:47 <CodeShark> but admittedly, that part of the UI needs some work
430 2015-06-24 22:32:21 <CodeShark> the addresses dialog will show you the description
431 2015-06-24 22:32:33 <Luke-Jr> I was trying to see the script :P
432 2015-06-24 22:32:54 <CodeShark> well, originally I actually called the dialog "scripts" but that seemed to confuse people even more
433 2015-06-24 22:32:59 <CodeShark> lol
434 2015-06-24 22:33:48 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: sendign, I click Sign and it says additional singatures required 1
435 2015-06-24 22:34:04 <CodeShark> what's the policy on the account?
436 2015-06-24 22:34:08 <CodeShark> 1-of-1?
437 2015-06-24 22:34:33 <Luke-Jr> I presume
438 2015-06-24 22:35:04 <CodeShark> if you pop open the signatures dialog box, you should see a list of signers - right click a signer and click "sign"
439 2015-06-24 22:35:08 <Luke-Jr> aha
440 2015-06-24 22:35:31 <Luke-Jr> now Confirmations says Unsent even when I told it to send
441 2015-06-24 22:35:41 <midnightmagic> CodeShark: does it get invoices via a payment channel (like the ssl type thingy that I can't find anybody using in bitcoin-qt)?
442 2015-06-24 22:35:45 <CodeShark> are you connected to a node and synched?
443 2015-06-24 22:35:49 <Luke-Jr> yes
444 2015-06-24 22:36:05 <CodeShark> midnightmagic: I'm working on payment channel support at the moment
445 2015-06-24 22:36:41 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: if it is still unsent it means your node rejected it for some reason, most likely - could be a low fee, possibly
446 2015-06-24 22:36:48 <Luke-Jr> oh, maybe
447 2015-06-24 22:37:29 <CodeShark> the fee logic is all awry...it's almost impossible to do any decent fee stuff with SPV (as a discussion yesterday made clear)
448 2015-06-24 22:37:46 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: could bump the fee until it gets accepted :P
449 2015-06-24 22:37:51 <CodeShark> lol
450 2015-06-24 22:38:16 <Luke-Jr> I'm currently of the thought that the ability to guess a good fee off-the-bat is an incentive for running full nodes ;)
451 2015-06-24 22:38:40 <ajweiss> you can ask via rpc
452 2015-06-24 22:38:59 <CodeShark> I've avoided RPC because I wanted to only require compatibility with the p2p protocol
453 2015-06-24 22:39:11 <CodeShark> I wanted to avoid any additional nonstandard protocol compliance
454 2015-06-24 22:39:20 <ajweiss> that and what if, there was a secure protocol for talking to your own fullnode from a thinclient
455 2015-06-24 22:39:39 <ajweiss> that
456 2015-06-24 22:39:47 <ajweiss> s what i was jibberjabbering about earlier
457 2015-06-24 22:40:09 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: I suppose it could keep trying to resend...in this situation it's just the relay node dust filtering
458 2015-06-24 22:40:28 <CodeShark> but argh - lol
459 2015-06-24 22:40:59 <CodeShark> it's actually a lot trickier than that because each time it needs a new signature
460 2015-06-24 22:41:09 <midnightmagic> CodeShark: when you do, it would be awesome if you provided a way to *save* an invoice plus the certificate that was used to sign it and provide a way for other people to take that data and verify it themselves along with a comparison against the certificate *they* can download from the same place.
461 2015-06-24 22:41:51 <midnightmagic> :-)
462 2015-06-24 22:42:36 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: can presign multiple variants upfront
463 2015-06-24 22:42:49 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: true...
464 2015-06-24 22:44:14 <CodeShark> let's face it - the protocol was not really designed to make any of this particularly easy - and SPV makes it basically impossible to really pull off in the end
465 2015-06-24 22:44:56 <CodeShark> any of this fee stuff, that is
466 2015-06-24 22:45:28 <CodeShark> there are lots of half-way hacks we could pull off to sort of make some of it work temporarily...but it will all break sooner or later
467 2015-06-24 22:46:10 <Luke-Jr> nah, SPV nodes can just gradually bump the fee as necessary
468 2015-06-24 22:47:48 <CodeShark> Luke-Jr: for outgoing transactions, yes. for bound transactions it's still very much a bitch
469 2015-06-24 22:47:53 <CodeShark> *for inbound
470 2015-06-24 22:49:00 <Luke-Jr> could use a separate keychain for inbound and leave it unencrypted, then have the CPFP spend it to the encrypted change script
471 2015-06-24 22:51:24 <CodeShark> not particularly thrilled with that prospect considering that one of the principal use cases is allowing you to invoice directly into a secure account
472 2015-06-24 22:51:25 <CodeShark> lol
473 2015-06-24 22:52:27 <CodeShark> not only are the keychains encrypted for this use case - you would generally need multiple devices to cooperate in signing
474 2015-06-24 22:53:00 <Luke-Jr> dnsseed.dat is 607 MB :o
475 2015-06-24 23:26:41 <dcousens> in #bitcoinjs-dev
476 2015-06-24 23:27:03 <dcousens> ah, nvm that