Discussion:
[Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin Core 0.9rc1 release schedule
(too old to reply)
Wladimir
2014-01-16 09:09:52 UTC
Permalink
Hello all,

It has been way to long since last major release. Many improvements and new
features have been added to master since, so we'd like to do a 0.9rc1
release soon.

The current aim is next month, February 2014.

Of course there are still some open issues that need to be resolved before
release
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues?milestone=12&state=open

If there is something else that you're working on and needs to end up in
0.9, or know of some nasty bug in master that should absolutely be solved
first, please tell.

Wladimir
Warren Togami Jr.
2014-01-16 10:41:37 UTC
Permalink
Just a small note of caution for those joining in testing.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3529
Currently the master branch has this issue where leveldb renames all of
.sst files to .ldb. This makes running the 0.8.x version of Bitcoin think
the index is corrupt. Until a fix is included in Bitcoin master, a
workaround to allow 0.8.x to work again is to simply rename all the files
from .ldb back to .sst.

(This workaround worked for me today but failed yesterday. It's possible I
made an error yesterday. If it fails for you please report as we really
need to know if there are other leveldb incompatibilities.)

https://github.com/bitcoin/leveldb/pull/3
The fix for Bitcoin's leveldb is being discussed here.

Warren
Post by Wladimir
Hello all,
It has been way to long since last major release. Many improvements and
new features have been added to master since, so we'd like to do a 0.9rc1
release soon.
The current aim is next month, February 2014.
Of course there are still some open issues that need to be resolved before
release
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues?milestone=12&state=open
If there is something else that you're working on and needs to end up in
0.9, or know of some nasty bug in master that should absolutely be solved
first, please tell.
Wladimir
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Luke-Jr
2014-01-16 15:23:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wladimir
Hello all,
It has been way to long since last major release. Many improvements and new
features have been added to master since, so we'd like to do a 0.9rc1
release soon.
The current aim is next month, February 2014.
Of course there are still some open issues that need to be resolved before
release
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues?milestone=12&state=open
If there is something else that you're working on and needs to end up in
0.9, or know of some nasty bug in master that should absolutely be solved
first, please tell.
Wladimir
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/luke-jr

These are pretty much all well-tested and stable for months now.
Wladimir
2014-01-17 11:44:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luke-Jr
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/luke-jr
These are pretty much all well-tested and stable for months now.
#3242: Autoconf improvements needs rebase, and comment from jgarzik and me
taken into account (about -enable-frontends=).

The others appear to be more controversial as they affect mining/consensus.
I'd really like to see ACKs from more reviewers and testers there before
merging.

Wladimir
Luke-Jr
2014-01-17 18:41:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wladimir
Post by Luke-Jr
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/luke-jr
These are pretty much all well-tested and stable for months now.
#3242: Autoconf improvements needs rebase, and comment from jgarzik and me
taken into account (about -enable-frontends=).
I'll try to get this done over the weekend.
Post by Wladimir
The others appear to be more controversial as they affect mining/consensus.
I'd really like to see ACKs from more reviewers and testers there before
merging.
Can you elaborate on this? I can see how Proposals might, if buggy, affect
consensus, but the rest shouldn't. I don't think there's anything
controversial in any of these (does someone disagree with CPFP?).

Luke
Jeff Garzik
2014-01-17 20:53:47 UTC
Permalink
<vendor hat: on> BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in upstream.

I think the main hurdle to merging was that various people disagreed
on various edge case handling and implementation details, but no
fundamental objections.
Post by Luke-Jr
Post by Wladimir
Post by Luke-Jr
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/luke-jr
These are pretty much all well-tested and stable for months now.
#3242: Autoconf improvements needs rebase, and comment from jgarzik and me
taken into account (about -enable-frontends=).
I'll try to get this done over the weekend.
Post by Wladimir
The others appear to be more controversial as they affect mining/consensus.
I'd really like to see ACKs from more reviewers and testers there before
merging.
Can you elaborate on this? I can see how Proposals might, if buggy, affect
consensus, but the rest shouldn't. I don't think there's anything
controversial in any of these (does someone disagree with CPFP?).
Luke
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
Mark Friedenbach
2014-01-17 21:04:16 UTC
Permalink
CPFP is *extremely* important. People have lost money because this
feature is missing. I think it's critical that it makes it into 0.9

If I get a low-priority donation from a blockchain.info wallet, that
money can disappear if it doesn't make it into a block in 24 hours -
bc.i will forget the transaction and happily respend its inputs on the
next transaction that user makes.

I wouldn't mind paying $1 in fees to receive a $50 donation. But
without CPFP there's no way to do that.
Post by Jeff Garzik
<vendor hat: on> BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in upstream.
I think the main hurdle to merging was that various people
disagreed on various edge case handling and implementation details,
but no fundamental objections.
Jouke Hofman
2014-01-18 11:34:41 UTC
Permalink
We rebroadcast incoming transactions without fees at several nodes,
including bc.info, to keep them in mempools.
Post by Mark Friedenbach
CPFP is *extremely* important. People have lost money because this
feature is missing. I think it's critical that it makes it into 0.9
If I get a low-priority donation from a blockchain.info wallet,
that money can disappear if it doesn't make it into a block in 24
hours - bc.i will forget the transaction and happily respend its
inputs on the next transaction that user makes.
I wouldn't mind paying $1 in fees to receive a $50 donation. But
without CPFP there's no way to do that.
Post by Jeff Garzik
<vendor hat: on> BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in
upstream.
I think the main hurdle to merging was that various people
disagreed on various edge case handling and implementation
details, but no fundamental objections.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Post by Mark Friedenbach
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In
Between. Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Post by Mark Friedenbach
Bitcoin-development mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Luke-Jr
2014-01-17 21:31:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff Garzik
<vendor hat: on> BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in upstream.
I think the main hurdle to merging was that various people disagreed
on various edge case handling and implementation details, but no
fundamental objections.
Heck, even I disagree with implementation details, but it's still better than
nothing. We can always merge major reorganisations/reimplementations later
when they're written: merging this one doesn't mean we're stuck with it
forever...

Luke
Odinn Cyberguerrilla
2014-01-18 08:11:02 UTC
Permalink
<ABISprotocol hat: on>

regarding:
stuff not getting into blockchain in a day's time,
microdonations not facilitated as much as they could be,

that would be:

very bad
much news
such fail

Seriously, that would not be so good.

Hope I made you laugh a bit
Post by Jeff Garzik
<vendor hat: on> BitPay sure would like to see CPFP in upstream.
I think the main hurdle to merging was that various people disagreed
on various edge case handling and implementation details, but no
fundamental objections.
Post by Luke-Jr
Post by Wladimir
Post by Luke-Jr
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/luke-jr
These are pretty much all well-tested and stable for months now.
#3242: Autoconf improvements needs rebase, and comment from jgarzik and me
taken into account (about -enable-frontends=).
I'll try to get this done over the weekend.
Post by Wladimir
The others appear to be more controversial as they affect
mining/consensus.
I'd really like to see ACKs from more reviewers and testers there before
merging.
Can you elaborate on this? I can see how Proposals might, if buggy, affect
consensus, but the rest shouldn't. I don't think there's anything
controversial in any of these (does someone disagree with CPFP?).
Luke
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Wladimir
2014-01-18 11:05:30 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Odinn Cyberguerrilla <
Post by Odinn Cyberguerrilla
<ABISprotocol hat: on>
stuff not getting into blockchain in a day's time,
microdonations not facilitated as much as they could be,
Please point to your pull requests improving these issues.

If your organization didn't contribute anything to further these issues
then there can't be much surprise that they didn't make it in, either.
Post by Odinn Cyberguerrilla
very bad
much news
such fail
Seriously, that would not be so good.
Hope I made you laugh a bit
So it's more like a jester's hat then :)
How did I end up on the dogecoin-development list?!?

Wladimir
Odinn Cyberguerrilla
2014-01-18 11:28:25 UTC
Permalink
clarification, I am not a doge dev. It was intended just as a joke, to
make you laugh.

regarding pull requests improving these issues I am under the impression
that the developers will take care of what needs to be taken care of in
that regard. Am presently in collaboration on a bitcoin project that may
implement aspects of the ABIS concept as presented, but it is in very very
early stage(es).

I hope you had a good laugh, that was my intent. good morning / afternoon
/ evening
Post by Wladimir
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Odinn Cyberguerrilla <
Post by Odinn Cyberguerrilla
<ABISprotocol hat: on>
stuff not getting into blockchain in a day's time,
microdonations not facilitated as much as they could be,
Please point to your pull requests improving these issues.
If your organization didn't contribute anything to further these issues
then there can't be much surprise that they didn't make it in, either.
Post by Odinn Cyberguerrilla
very bad
much news
such fail
Seriously, that would not be so good.
Hope I made you laugh a bit
So it's more like a jester's hat then :)
How did I end up on the dogecoin-development list?!?
Wladimir
Mark Friedenbach
2014-01-18 17:38:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wladimir
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Odinn Cyberguerrilla
<ABISprotocol hat: on>
stuff not getting into blockchain in a day's time,
microdonations not facilitated as much as they could be,
Please point to your pull requests improving these issues.
If your organization didn't contribute anything to further these issues
then there can't be much surprise that they didn't make it in, either.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1647
Jeff Garzik
2014-01-19 02:53:09 UTC
Permalink
There's a reason why luke-jr's pull request for CPfP remains open.
There is general agreement that it appears to be useful. CPfP works
to close the mismatch between how bitcoin transaction fees are
attached by the sender, versus modern economic situations where the
receiver is willing to pay a fee.
Post by Mark Friedenbach
Post by Wladimir
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Odinn Cyberguerrilla
<ABISprotocol hat: on>
stuff not getting into blockchain in a day's time,
microdonations not facilitated as much as they could be,
Please point to your pull requests improving these issues.
If your organization didn't contribute anything to further these issues
then there can't be much surprise that they didn't make it in, either.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1647
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
Wladimir
2014-01-19 10:24:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff Garzik
There's a reason why luke-jr's pull request for CPfP remains open.
There is general agreement that it appears to be useful. CPfP works
to close the mismatch between how bitcoin transaction fees are
attached by the sender, versus modern economic situations where the
receiver is willing to pay a fee.
The only thing controversial are the code changes themselves, not the
feature.

Consensus running through the comments in the pull is that it needs
(auto)tests.

Are you going to do this Luke? Or is anyone else working on this?

Wladimir
Wladimir
2014-01-23 11:10:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wladimir
Consensus running through the comments in the pull is that it needs
(auto)tests.
Are you going to do this Luke? Or is anyone else working on this?
*crickets*

Anyone willing to give pull #1647 its final push by addressing the
comments, so that it can be integrated in the 0.9 release?

Wladimir

Loading...