Dev Meeting Transcripts (July 2022)[4:00 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Channel open
[4:45 PM] Seal Clubber: For those that have not seen it yet, I have been working on making a publicly availible rvn pool:
https://discord.com/channels/429127343165145089/429133749867905024/988249153098383360[4:46 PM] Seal Clubber: Still needs some work, if it want to be used for productions cases. But should work perfect for the solominer with multiple rigs, since it uses PROP payouts.
[5:07 PM] Jeroz:
https://github.com/RavenProject/Ravencoin/pull/1196[5:07 PM] Jeroz: Review and test please
[5:19 PM] BadGuyTy: I looked over it I'm not a great cpp guy but it is not trying to do anything crazy just adds a new variable to keep the p2sh and p2pkh using different calculations.
[5:23 PM] BadGuyTy: Ok It is July 1st. I want to see this release out the door this quarter. If not before ETH goes PoS. I want to show that we (RVN) are in active development. I'm excited for minable assets but thats not possible while sitting on p2sh twiddling our thumbs. If no one is going to grab this torch and carry it I guess I will start by throwing [the torch] at some people.
[5:27 PM] BadGuyTy: What tests do we need to have done at a minimum?
What bugs are still outstanding?
What methods do we have for collecting contact information for the new hard fork?
Can we start advertising that we are going to make this fork happen and that we need current contact information for exchanges?
Let's set some goals up for people to do. If we don't start handing out tasks with deadlines this isn't going to get done.
[5:27 PM] Jeroz: I understand your concern but if the new consensus rules are not thoroughly tested, you increase the risk ending up empty handed.
[5:29 PM] BadGuyTy: Exactly I'm saying let's get this done. with assignments and due dates. Right now its to ephemeral so we have stalled.
[5:30 PM] Jeroz: Pick up where fdov left it off id say. He had a whole list
[5:31 PM] BadGuyTy: I have been "waiting" for asset p2sh since like November and just moved to an alternative solution as a work around.
[5:34 PM] Jeroz: Well it’s an urgency/risk trade-off.
If you and hopefully others speak up and say: hey, I’m ready to utilize this and I need this on the chain! Then it gets more urgent.
Perhaps start with making a list of that, so that we know how high the demand is.
[5:34 PM] BadGuyTy: wait did he delete his history when he left?
[5:34 PM] Jeroz: I’m not sure
[5:34 PM] BadGuyTy: I find nothing in search
[5:36 PM] Jeroz: Might be not searchable since the user isn’t here.
[5:37 PM] Jeroz: Yeah that’s it:
https://discord.com/channels/429127343165145089/473712306300256256/918566015456129084[5:37 PM] BadGuyTy: oh ok
[5:38 PM] Jeroz: Here’s the list:
https://github.com/fdoving/RavenStash/blob/main/testing-4.7.0test.md[5:38 PM] BadGuyTy: ok sweet.
[5:44 PM] BadGuyTy: Ok i'm on vacation this next week and a half I'm bringing along a laptop may just write something up on the beach. we'll see what my wife allows
------------------------------------------------
[4:01 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Channel open!
[4:04 PM] LSJI07: Hi
[4:10 PM] Seal Clubber: Any prebuild binaries on blondfrogs new fix?
[4:11 PM] Seal Clubber:
https://github.com/RavenProject/Ravencoin/pull/1196[4:11 PM] Seal Clubber: Dis one
[4:17 PM] Jeroz: The pull request has binaries
[4:18 PM] Jeroz:
https://github.com/RavenProject/Ravencoin/pull/1196/checksUnder artifacts
[4:45 PM] LSJI07: @JerozI can see the binaries build completed successfully etc but they don't seem be available to download.
[4:46 PM] Hans_Schmidt: If you want to use the link which Jeroz provided, then
1) that link will only work if you have a github account and you are logged in.
2) that build does NOT include the fix for the bug which causes testnet sync to hang at 1127354
[4:46 PM] LSJI07: I'm stupid. Click Artifacts......
[4:49 PM] JustaResearcher: When segwit?
[4:50 PM] JustaResearcher: 😃
[4:50 PM] LSJI07: After p2sh. 🙂
[4:50 PM] JustaResearcher: Cool.
[4:51 PM] LSJI07: Well... Everything atm is after p2sh. 😂
[5:00 PM] Hans_Schmidt: On 2nd thought, if you use the link which Jeroz provided, you probably won't encounter the block 1127354 sync hang bug (at least not at that block) because
it will put you on your own fork, and that fork will be stalled unless you also mine it yourself.
[5:02 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): So we cannot test the bug fix without forking the testnet?
[5:02 PM] LSJI07: regtest would be better.
[5:02 PM] Seal Clubber: Or would we have to "merge" this with the latest testnet and build it from source?
[5:03 PM] LSJI07: we would have to bip9 the change into testnet to do it smoothly imo.
[5:04 PM] Hans_Schmidt: It requires a chain fork. This is the kind of thing which Tron talks about when he urges caution. BIP9 is needed for a coordinated fork.
[5:07 PM] Hans_Schmidt: Without BIP9 the fork would also have to go all the way back 6 months or more to whenever the first person tried to tag a P2SH address.
[5:08 PM] LSJI07: I think this should be added by bip9 and tested in testnet properly. Especially as this smaller portion affects the larger p2sh code and restricted assets and tags. Testing it in isolation has value but imo it should all be on testnet.
[5:09 PM] Seal Clubber: This wouldnt matter if we were to fork it into mainnet later on right?
[5:13 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): So how should we go about proceeding? I know many are anxious to get testing P2SH with qualifiers/restricted assets.
[5:15 PM] Hans_Schmidt: I could write BIP9 code around only PR1196. Or we could just all agree to switch to a new version with the PR included.
We actually never did BIP9 on testnet for the P2SH code. We just all agreed to mass switch to v4.7
It's a bit of a mess because at this point not matter what we do for mainnet, it won't be the exact code we ran on testnet unless we fork way back to when we introduced P2SH on testnet and start over.
[5:16 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): What would you recommend? I'm fine with either. Just want to make sure we do it right.
[5:18 PM] LSJI07: To me it matters because the alternative is skipping testnet out. I think there was a testnet bip9 for p2sh just it was really fast 1.4 days cycles. I think we should focus on sorting testnet out before attempting mainnet.
[5:18 PM] Seal Clubber: This does sound like the right way to do it, also would help when we actualy fork right
[5:19 PM] Hans_Schmidt: I'll take a look at it coming week if I have time. The PR is actually quite simple. The only question is how to test best.
[5:20 PM] LSJI07: Everything should be available on testnet before mainnet imo. Thanks for your work guys.
[5:22 PM] Someone_2: readd the code/fix for the testnet sync bug later on then?
[5:24 PM] Hans_Schmidt: If I do a test build, it will be cumulative and include all desired PRs.
[5:38 PM] Hans_Schmidt: You may be correct about having used a very short BIP9 forP2SH on testnet. I don't recall. I tried to check v4.7.0test1 but it was fdov's private test build and its commit # no longer exists in fdov's repo or the "official" repo, so I can't check the source code.
[5:43 PM] LSJI07: i run Raven Core version v4.7.0.0-b5010492c (64-bit) on mainnet from fdov. I can put it in testnet and check the chain info.
[5:50 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Would it be worth sending him a message or are you able to work around this?
[6:03 PM] LSJI07:
"chain": "test",
"blocks": 1207702,
"headers": 1215669,
"bestblockhash": "000000425894fc328b414d91257270c531c937612f1616d9f6273949d10a945c",
"difficulty": 0.01102579145195381,
"difficulty_algorithm": "DGW-180",
"mediantime": 1653230310,
"verificationprogress": 0.9443709413270003,
"chainwork": "000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000de0dd2424e0bf",
"size_on_disk": 651543708,
"pruned": false,
"softforks": [
],
"bip9_softforks": {
"assets": {
"status": "active",
"startTime": 1533924000,
"timeout": 1577257200,
"since": 6048
},
"messaging_restricted": {
"status": "active",
"startTime": 1570428000,
"timeout": 1577257200,
"since": 10080
},
"transfer_script": {
"status": "active",
"startTime": 1586973600,
"timeout": 1618509600,
"since": 268128
},
"enforce": {
"status": "active",
"startTime": 1593453600,
"timeout": 1624989600,
"since": 334656
},
"coinbase": {
"status": "active",
"startTime": 1597341600,
"timeout": 1628877600,
"since": 463680
},
"p2sh_assets": {
"status": "active",
"startTime": 1619971200,
"timeout": 1651507200,
"since": 707616
}
},
"warnings": ""
}
[6:16 PM] Hans_Schmidt: It's not a problem. The history of what happened is obviously on the chain if we care to dig into details 😉
[6:40 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): I'll go ahead and close the channel. Further discussion can continue in development
Thanks for coming, everyone! 🙂
------------------------------------------------
[4:00 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Channel open
[4:02 PM] Tron: Hi all.
[4:03 PM] Jeroz: 👋
[4:04 PM] Someone_2: If I could figure out how to do the wave emojoi I would 🙂
[4:04 PM] Someone_2: 👋
[4:06 PM] Tron: In our last board meeting (Monday) we discussed proposing a bounty for open-source mining pool, updated explorer, efficient open-source miner. Thoughts?
[4:08 PM] Jeroz: Mango asked me some time ago already about pool software. I have one built by traysi/minermore. He asked me to contact him first before sharing it with others but I have no way of contacting him anymore. Maybe via buzzdave?
[4:09 PM] Jeroz: I used it only for tRVN for some time
[4:10 PM] kralverde 🤡 🇺🇸: The actual mining software such as kawpow miner?
[4:12 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): @Seal Clubber and @Hans_Schmidt have also done some work on that.
https://github.com/Seal-Clubber/cyberpool-ravencoin-serverhttps://github.com/hans-schmidt/kawpow_personal_stratum_serverand @kralverde 🤡 🇺🇸 published
https://github.com/kralverde/ravencoin-stratum-proxy[4:12 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): I think it's a fantastic idea to provide more tools for developers to build from.
[4:13 PM] Hans_Schmidt: Actual pool software is different because it keeps track of multiple user accounts. The license should tell you what you can and can't do regarding giving it away.
[4:14 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Kawpowminer not working on current gen AMD cards has been a point of contention for a while so fixing that would be great.
[4:15 PM] Seal Clubber: if you have this, it would be great to have it open if the guys are okey with that, could run a community pool from the foundation
[4:16 PM] Tron:
https://github.com/Seal-Clubber/cyberpool-ravencoin-server is GPL3 which is very permissive -- not quite MIT, but really good.
[4:24 PM] Seal Clubber: that repo would need some work to have all the "up to spec" demands of the modern pool.
[4:25 PM] Tron: The bounty could be set up in such a way that minermore or an up-to-spec version would satisfy the requirements.
[4:26 PM] Seal Clubber: if you guys need some criteria for that ill be glad to help list some
[4:27 PM] Jeroz: If anyone knows how to get back in contact with them, let me know.
[4:28 PM] Seal Clubber: I think best bet would be buzzdave.
[4:28 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): I messaged buzzdave about minermore a few months ago but never heard back. The pool is still online so I assume he is around somewhere.
[4:29 PM] Jeroz: Their pool fee is actually 0% 😳
[4:29 PM] Tron: I was just looking through my contacts. I lost lots when I lost access to my Medici Ventures e-mail. But I still have some in old searchable notes. I'll reach out and see if I get a response.
[4:30 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Yes we asked them to lower it a while back and they did. Then no one mined there. lol
[4:31 PM] Jeroz: 293.08 Mh/s atm
[4:31 PM] Jeroz: They get a block every 1-2 days
[4:35 PM] Tron: Ok, I reached out to Buzzdave. I'll report back here if I get a response.
[4:36 PM] Jeroz: Cool
[4:43 PM] Mango Farm: Great. He is in here still @ buzz Dave too
[4:44 PM] Mango Farm: (I added the space so as not to ping him)
[5:04 PM] Seal Clubber: @kinkajou (SegWit Clique) time to wrap this one up?
[5:05 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): I've been leaving them open til 6 but we can go ahead and wrap this up
[5:05 PM] Seal Clubber: 6? that how many more hours?
[5:06 PM] Seal Clubber: eeh doesnt matter that much I guess
[5:26 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): 35min 😛 but ill close it now. thanks for coming everyone.
[5:44 PM] Tron: Update: BuzzDave got back to me. He is going to talk to Traysi, and decide from there. The ask was to determine what type of bounty would make it worth it to turn minermore over as open-source.
------------------------------------------------
[4:00 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Channel open
[4:11 PM] BadGuyTy: 👋
[4:11 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): @Tron you mentioned in the whatsuprvn talk we could go in and fix the transaction malleability bug outright as opposed to SegWit. Would this still allow us to use Lightning Network?
A large part of my desire for SegWit is because I'd like to be able to benefit from the billions of dollars worth of R&D bitcoin has already done on proven l2 scaling solutions rather than having to reinvent the wheel for Ravencoin.
[4:14 PM] Tron: Yes. Fixing the transaction malleability issue should allow lightning to work on Ravencoin. I'm not a lightning expert, but the main reason SegWit was required was because it fixed the transaction malleability issue, not because of anything special in SegWit. They just make the signing protocol more strict in SegWit. That way older versions that were not SegWit aware would still work, and newer clients would be SegWit aware and use only one format for signing transactions.
[4:15 PM] BadGuyTy: I was reading over last weeks meeting and I really like the Idea of a foundation mining pool where the nominal mining fee would go to the foundation
[4:16 PM] Tron: Lightning breaks if the valid signature can be ripped off, and then applied back with a different signing format. If the txid changes, all chained lightning transactions that depend on a legit chain of transaction ids would break.
[4:18 PM] Tron: If we do a hard fork anyway (for P2SH), the signing could be limited to a single format. It would be important to make sure all known clients sign in the selected format.
[4:18 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Right, that part I do understand. I am just assuming (potentially incorrectly) that there would be some non-zero amount of work involved adapting LN for Ravencoin if it's an entirely different transaction format (P2PKH vs P2WSH/P2WPKH) and I'm curious as to how feasible that is for a project of our size.
[4:20 PM] BadGuyTy: do we need a lightning network for raven right now?
[4:21 PM] Tron: That is a great question. I suspect there would be some work for that.
[4:21 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): No. But if RVN ever gets any significant adoption we will.
[4:21 PM] BadGuyTy: I mean I'm not going to turn my nose up at it but having been following blocks for squawker we still have empty blocks
[4:21 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): We can transact a near infinite amount of tokens.
[4:21 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Bitcoin just has the 1 (BTC)
[4:22 PM] Tron: Not now, but I can see the benefit of solving the transaction malleability issue to make Ravencoin Lightning capable.
[4:24 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Solving transaction malleability sounds like a great idea regardless of LN for merchant adoption of RVN payments.
[4:24 PM] BadGuyTy: I get that. I mean as I stare down the barrel of squawker possibly having adoptation It would be nice to be able to bundle those together in a lightning chain style single transaction
[4:27 PM] Seal Clubber: To get back on the pool, we currently only have gpl source code, would minermore be mit?
[4:28 PM] BadGuyTy: you get the code I would be willing to host
[4:28 PM] Tron: I have not heard back from BuzzDave yet.
[4:29 PM] Seal Clubber: If not there is miningcore,
https://github.com/oliverw/miningcore/discussions/876 if we ever get to funding a pool we should consider this imo
[4:29 PM] Seal Clubber: They have the "libs" for kawpow, just need work on the endpoints
[4:30 PM] Tron: I just texted BuzzDave to see if he'd made a decision.
[4:30 PM] Seal Clubber: Its also mit, but I woulf much better prefer if we can get the minermore version, and this as backup
[4:31 PM] Hans_Schmidt: Lightening could be built for RVN.
But Lightening fundamentally does not work as a scaling solution for assets. It would require every lightening node operator who wants to create a channel to own every asset for which it wants to create channels and own them in sufficient quantity to broker the transactions. For millions of assets, he would have to own all of them. And if it were possible to buy them on-the-spot, then the original party could do so also, and wouldn't need a Lightening channel. Of course for Restricted Assets it's a non-starter since the channel operator would not be allowed to broker.
[4:32 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): So then we're back to SegWit and bigger blocks being the most time-tested scaling solutions for assets?
[4:36 PM] Hans_Schmidt: Big blocks should be sufficient for a long time. BCH has had no scaling problems. I guess it depends if we plan to take over the world.
[4:36 PM] BadGuyTy: yes but for squawker where I am likely going to be the one doing all the transactions it would be a nice way to roll up all the transactions myself
[4:37 PM] Tron: Considering the complexities that Hans brought up, as well as asset issuance complexities related to the unique name requirement, it probably isn't practical to use lightning for assets.
[4:38 PM] BadGuyTy: and the bigger assets that wold want/need a lightning solution it would. be worth it for them to have a constructed side channel
[4:38 PM] Tron: For RVN it might be.
[4:38 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Not take over the world - just tokenize it 🙂
[4:39 PM] Tron: There are other advantages to solving transaction malleability. It would be nice to be able to rely on a transaction id.
[4:39 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Agreed. I'm all for solving transaction malleability either way.
[4:40 PM] BadGuyTy: im all for making the chain better period
[4:40 PM] Tron: I just heard back from BuzzDave. Minimum 0.65 BTC, and he still would like to get approval from Traysi.
[4:42 PM] BadGuyTy: how many rvn is that approx
[4:43 PM] Hans_Schmidt: There are lots of interesting protocols which can be built using strings of off-chain transactions which don't get broadcast until if/when the deal is concluded, but which require transaction malleability to be fixed.
[4:46 PM] Tron: ~560,000 RVN
[4:47 PM] BadGuyTy: :Ravemoticon_Sad: I don't think I could get anywhere near that.
[4:51 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Would the foundation contribute any of that? It would be possible to recoup the bounty if miners support the foundation by mining to the pool after it's up and running.
[4:51 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Assuming there is a fee like the vast majority of pools.
[4:53 PM] BadGuyTy: I could commit BadGuyMining (my small mining company that will be using Ravencoin to track ownership and disbursement) to mining to the pool afterwards and running the pool for the foundation with a reasonable fee of like 0.5% but I don't have upfront capital
[4:55 PM] Jeroz: I feel like if you want to get income from a foundation pool and at the same time open source that pool software with the intention to help anyone setting up pools and decentralize the chain more, aren’t you shooting yourself in the foot? As in, you lower the chance of getting miners while wanting them at the same time.
[4:57 PM] BadGuyTy: Kinda but If it is known as the "foundation pool" I think people would join it to support the foundation
[4:57 PM] Tron: The foundation would coordinate collecting the bounty. I would contribute some personally.
[5:01 PM] Seal Clubber: Miningcore is always an option too
[5:01 PM] Seal Clubber: And they would prob do it for waaaay less
[5:11 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): have you reached out? couldnt hurt to shop around
[5:21 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Definitely a bit counterintuitive but like Ty said I think people would support the foundation over other pools given all else equal.
[5:21 PM] Seal Clubber: Will do
[5:44 PM] BadGuyTy: the foundation pool wouldn't really be for the income but having it help subsidize some of the expenses would be nice
[5:44 PM] Jeroz: To gauge interest (or create it)
https://twitter.com/jeroz6/status/1550597639170920448[6:01 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Channel closed. thanks for coming everyone
------------------------------------------------
[4:00 PM] Starks: How do we jump on?
[4:00 PM] Baba Yaga CEO ฿: Hola
[4:00 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Channel open. There are a few items on the agenda today:
1.) @Seal Clubber has reached out to miningcore developers regarding the foundation pool bounty. I think this may be a better option to minermore and it's written in c++
2.) The github repo is set to private. This is a small/nonissue and Hans spoke on this in the nest, but I'd like to bring it up again here anyway. I'm not sure when this was changed but the Bitcoin repo is public and ours has been historically as well so would be nice to change it back.
[4:01 PM] Jeroz: I think it's safe to say that some people will mine to a foundation pool
https://twitter.com/jeroz6/status/1550597639170920448[4:01 PM] Seal Clubber: Written mostly in c with some touches of c++ etc*
[4:02 PM] Seal Clubber:
https://github.com/oliverw/miningcore/discussions/1334[4:02 PM] Seal Clubber: I started this discussion today, ill give it some time. No reactions yet
[4:05 PM] Someone_2: Seeking a bit of clarity. The point of a foundation pool is???...?? My assumptions would be that the pool fee goes to the foundation? Or would it perhaps be anything mined to it becomes donated funding to the foundation? or it's simply a free no fee pool? There may be others wondering about this too.
[4:08 PM] Tron: It was a suggestion from one of the Foundation board members. It does not need to be a Foundation pool, but rather open-source pool software that is easy to set up and run. An instance could be run by the foundation, but it isn't required.
[4:08 PM] Someone_2: Hehe, so not at all even remotely what I had thought it might even be 😂
[4:09 PM] Someone_2: Almost feeling sheepish but I am glad I asked 🙂
[4:10 PM] Tron: Which GitHub repo are we discussing in agenda item #2?
[4:10 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): RavenProject repo
[4:10 PM] Jeroz: Alright, since I see sometimes pools and exchanges having issues with wallets, I really think it's a good idea to have a new ravencoin release.
Something like 4.9 (since @Hans_Schmidt is up to that number). And perhaps save 5.0 for a P2SH assets fork?
I went trough the PRs that entered the repo after 4.3.2.1.
There are 64 PRs that are in the master branch already post-4.3.2.1 and there are 67 non-consensus PRs in develop that could be carried over. I assume that they still need discussion and perhaps testing.
I know from @Hans_Schmidt that he preferred having syncing fixes in there as well. So I poked around and we got PR #1189 in develop now too (which is the one Hans added to his 4.9 release too).
@Tron @Hans_Schmidt, how would you like to proceed with the commits in develop?
The non consensus ones are below.
e5ea80fd5 - Fix: resolves bug with in memory qualifier address checking (#1189)
e5ea80fd5 - DOC: Put the how-to md files front and center for novice users (#1076)
0472cd675 - FIX: resolves a mining bug caused by a lockup in CreateNewBlock loop (#1184)
7f27d355e - FIX: resolves an issue with RPC call createrawtransaction transferwithmessage (#1113)
bb8e0d166 - BACKPORT: net: Add missing locks in net.{cpp,h} (bitcoin #11744) (#1170)
dc0d953f6 - GUI: create and reissue asset views - browse ipfs button (#1144)
Expand
develop_commits.txt
5 KB
[4:10 PM] Tron:
Image
[4:11 PM] Tron: It is public, and I think it always has been.
[4:12 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): am i looking in the wrong place? i used to be able to see you/bruce/hans/hyperpeek/roshii and the people who had various roles
Image
[4:12 PM] Tron: It does have controls on it for who can merge, and requires approvals prior to merges.
[4:12 PM] Seal Clubber: Its a solid question
[4:15 PM] Tron: Here is the current info. If someone knows how to make that info visible, let me know.
[4:15 PM] Tron:
Image
[4:16 PM] JustaResearcher: I love the idea of a foundation pool, or atleast the software being released, open source. I’d love to run a pool but don’t have the coding ability atm.
[4:16 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): yes!!! this is exactly what I was referring to. I'm not sure how to make it public but I know at one point it was.
[4:16 PM] Tron: Drilling down....
[4:16 PM] Tron:
Image
[4:17 PM] Hans_Schmidt: I fixed the functional test fails on core, chose the appropriate set of PRs, updated some stale parameters, and put together a proposal for a mainnet release which includes all the latest bug fixes and niceties but NOT P2SH.
I have been using to since yesteday.
I am also about 65% done with a fresh mainnet sync-from-scratch which looks like it will finish in 4 hours. The link is:
https://github.com/hans-schmidt/Ravencoin/releases/tag/v4.6.0mainnet-rc1[4:17 PM] Starks: I concur with this
[4:18 PM] Tron: At first glance, I don't see an option to make that list (those lists) visible.
[4:19 PM] Tron: This seems like a great start. I'm on board with this.
[4:20 PM] Hans_Schmidt: The functional fails were nothing troublesome.
On bitcoin, regtest rejects nonstandard transactions, but the "-acceptnonstdtxn" cli option can be used to over-ride that default.
On raven-v4.3.2.1, regtest allows nonstandard transactions, and the "-acceptnonstdtxn" cli option is broken on all nets (never does anything).
One of the PRs fixes that bug so than rvn regtest now works like btc. But some of the functional tests were written to require nonstandard transactions.
So I fixed the broken functional tests by telling the test framework to use the "-acceptnonstdtxn" cli option.
[4:22 PM] Jeroz: Are there any commits in there that still need specific tests @Hans_Schmidt?
[4:23 PM] Tron: Only on regtest?
[4:24 PM] Hans_Schmidt: I don't think so. The only things new are the functional test debug and a few stale updated parameters (like a new checkpoint).
[4:27 PM] Hans_Schmidt: The functional tests use regtest which is why that is relevant. The cli option was broken on raven on all mainnet/testnet/regtest and had no effect. The behavior is now closer to bitcoin's. It can't be exactly the same because bitcoin also has signet.
[4:27 PM] Jeroz: ill try to build it then and sync from scratch 🙂
[4:28 PM] Hans_Schmidt: I supplied binaries for all platforms at that link. But feel free to build yourself for fun 🙂
[4:33 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Great job, Hans 🙂 thanks for all your continued work on the project! I agree with @Jeroz on pushing out a new release with some of bug fixes/QoL improvements. This will also give us an opportunity to start rebuilding that contact list which will be essential for the P2SH (or any other) fork.
[4:36 PM] Jeroz: I actually started building. (My vacation just started) lmao
[4:37 PM] Hans_Schmidt: I picked the v4.6.0 label because people have come to expect that >=v4.7 means P2SH
[4:38 PM] Jeroz: I dont really have strong opinions about it tbh. As long as its below 5. I think something like a fork should be a "major" thing
[4:44 PM] Jeroz: Oh @Tron did you get my email? Not dev related per se, but huobi asked if you were up for doing an AMA to teach their community about mining ravencoin. I thought it could very nicely be combined with the pool idea.
[4:56 PM] Tron: I am up for the Huobi AMA.
[4:59 PM] Tron: I just replied to you, and to Huobi.
[5:17 PM] JustaResearcher: Do we have any sort of timeline for this foundation pool?
[5:20 PM] Jeroz: I assume it mostly depends on getting answers from the parties who are willing to open source for a certain compensation. And subsequently raising funds for it.
[5:25 PM] JustaResearcher: Makes sense. So we are just waiting now. I’m very interested in this, so if we hear back I’m happy to help in any way I can. Even if that just means helping with the fundraising. I have a small but mighty Twitter account haha
[5:31 PM] Starks: @kinkajou (SegWit Clique) - who are the people we need to get to open source?
[5:34 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): Afaik we're waiting on a response from Traysi.
[5:34 PM] Starks: Given he is AFK, do we expect a response soon?
[5:34 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): It sounds like miningcore devs might be willing to do it for cheaper though so that's something that should be taken into consideration if that's the case. Also written in the same language(s) our existing/future core developers are familiar with
[5:35 PM] Starks: When can we approach them?
[5:35 PM] Starks: And who are the people we need to speak to there?
[5:35 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): @Seal Clubber already has written to them on github
[5:37 PM] Jeroz: Theres far less people able to code in cpp though
[5:39 PM] Jeroz: assuming the other is in node.js
[5:50 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): fair point. our most active devs seem to be c/cpp though. I am biased - cpp is my preferred language and I don't know JS. 0.65BTC is quite expensive though. many times more than I would think a pool should cost.
[6:05 PM] kinkajou (SegWit Clique): ill go ahead and close the channel. we can continue in development
