Changes for version 0.6 are being pulled into HEAD
10 messages, 20 to 21 Dec 2011. Started by Gavin Andresen.
Luke Dashjr (5), Jeff Garzik (2), Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn, Wladimir J. van der Laan
FYI for anybody who doesn't hang out in IRC:
I've been busy pulling patches into git HEAD for a Bitcoin version 0.6, with the goal of having a Release Candidate 1 out in a couple of weeks.
So if you've done all your Christmas shopping and have time to help test, code review, etc. now would be the time.
On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 3:49:16 PM Gavin Andresen wrote:
Quoted text (3 lines)
> I've been busy pulling patches into git HEAD for a Bitcoin version > 0.6, with the goal of having a Release Candidate 1 out in a couple of > weeks.
I've rebuilt my 'next' and 'next-test' branches...
git://gitorious.org/~Luke-Jr/bitcoin/luke-jr-bitcoin.git
Accepted for 0.6: * 81807c3 Merge branch 'coinbaser' into next * 6ea6db3 Merge remote branch 'laanwj/ui_copy_amount' into next * a6ef83e Merge 'QR Code generation via libqrencode' into next * e0673bd Merge branch 'signmessage_gui' into next
Ready for acceptance? * 4783528 Merge remote branch 'matt/keepnode' into next-test * 5a11d0f Merge branch 'force_send' into next-test * 2cddc71 Merge remote branch 'sipa/comprpubkey' into next-test * 73a8ca6 Merge remote branch 'matt/uri' into next-test * 9314427 Merge remote branch 'gavin/testnetdifficulty' into next-test * 1360e43 Merge branch 'stdint' into next-test
Needs review:
* 6ee82ff Merge branch 'forceresendtx' into next-test
* 8a82ba6 Merge branch 'blknotify' into next-test
* 674f1a6 Merge 'Temporarily disable "minimize to tray" in the startup phase
if the "-min" option is specified' into next-test
* 5afd4de Merge branch 'bugfix_client_name' into next-test
Cannot be merged cleanly (at least not into next-test at this point): * Pull 556 txinfo * Pull 568 JSON-RPC multithreading + rpc_keepalive * Pull 457 IPv6 JSON-RPC * Pull 427 IPv6 * Pull 565 optimize_FastGetWork * Pull 430 joelkatz optimizations * Pull 562 optimize_ToHex * Pull 452 JSON-RPC API versioning
Not yet written: * Treat generation (almost) like normal receive * JSON-RPC with integer amounts
Thanks for this summary Luke.
Git does not produce very helpful summaries when every commit is a merge. Is there a way to fix that? You have to guess what a change does based on the name of the topic branch currently.
Woohoo, 0.6.0 merging time!
I'll merge some GUI pull requests for 0.6.x this/next week.
Wladimir
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail•com>wrote:
Quoted text (25 lines)
> FYI for anybody who doesn't hang out in IRC: > > I've been busy pulling patches into git HEAD for a Bitcoin version > 0.6, with the goal of having a Release Candidate 1 out in a couple of > weeks. > > So if you've done all your Christmas shopping and have time to help > test, code review, etc. now would be the time. > > -- > -- > Gavin Andresen > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Write once. Port to many. > Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create > new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the > Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 5:12:07 AM Mike Hearn wrote:
Quoted text (3 lines)
> Git does not produce very helpful summaries when every commit is a merge. > Is there a way to fix that? You have to guess what a change does based on > the name of the topic branch currently.
Not sure what you mean. Maybe `git log --no-merges` ?
On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 8:46:41 PM Luke-Jr wrote:
Quoted text (7 lines)
> On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 3:49:16 PM Gavin Andresen wrote: > > I've been busy pulling patches into git HEAD for a Bitcoin version > > 0.6, with the goal of having a Release Candidate 1 out in a couple of > > weeks. > > I've rebuilt my 'next' and 'next-test' branches... > git://gitorious.org/~Luke-Jr/bitcoin/luke-jr-bitcoin.git
And here's yet another update, this time with a total of 21 branches merged. Anyone want to make binaries to get these branches some wider testing?
Accepted for 0.6: * 81807c3 (pull 719) Coinbaser * 6ea6db3 (pull 683) Context menu updates for TransactionView and... * a6ef83e (pull 629) QR Code generation via libqrencode * e0673bd (pull 582) Bitcoin-Qt signmessage GUI
Ready for acceptance? * 4783528 (pull 454) Add -keepnode which attempts to -addnode and keep a... * 5a11d0f (pull 570) Specify fees explicitly via JSON-RPC * 2cddc71 (pull 649) Compressed pubkeys * 73a8ca6 (pull 593) Full URL Support in bitcoin-qt * 27a2460 (pull 721) 'getmininginfo' method * e57ccf4 (pull 686) Testnet difficulty calculation changes, to take effect... * 5b4a18d (pull 720) Use standard C99 (and Qt) types for 64-bit integers
Needs review: * c7ee97d (pull 421) added option -forceresendtx * cff2c28 (pull 714) Execute a command when best block changes... * 3ca784f (pull 691) Temporarily disable "minimize to tray" in the startup... * 59842f5 (pull 568) Multithreaded JSON-RPC with HTTP 1.1 Keep-Alive support * d08e8fd (pull 565) FastGetWork optimization * 0dc52ac (pull 715) Bugfix: comply with BIP 0014 ... * f88dddc (pull 559) -acceptnonstdtxn option to skip "non-standard... * 95d3e7e (pull 552) Typo-tolerant (optimized) Base58 parser * 45beffe (pull 553) Parse URIs with non-BTC amounts * 74439a5 (pull 562) Optimized binary-to-hex converter (ToHex)
Cannot be merged cleanly (at least not into next-test at this point): * (pull 430) joelkatz optimizations * (pull 452) JSON-RPC API versioning * (pull 457) IPv6 JSON-RPC * (pull 427) IPv6
Not yet written: * Treat generation (almost) like normal receive * JSON-RPC with integer amounts
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote:
Quoted text (2 lines)
> Accepted for 0.6: > * 81807c3 (pull 719) Coinbaser
This is not "accepted" as discussed yesterday on IRC. You need to find buy-in from some other miners to make sure this is what "they" want, rather than just what "you" want.
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 12:12:43 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
Quoted text (7 lines)
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote: > > Accepted for 0.6: > > * 81807c3 (pull 719) Coinbaser > > This is not "accepted" as discussed yesterday on IRC. You need to > find buy-in from some other miners to make sure this is what "they" > want, rather than just what "you" want.
It was per Gavin on IRC before yesterday. And there is already buy-in from other miners.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote:
Quoted text (10 lines)
> On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 12:12:43 PM Jeff Garzik wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote: >> > Accepted for 0.6: >> > * 81807c3 (pull 719) Coinbaser >> >> This is not "accepted" as discussed yesterday on IRC. You need to >> find buy-in from some other miners to make sure this is what "they" >> want, rather than just what "you" want. > > It was per Gavin on IRC before yesterday.
Quoting IRC yesterday, <gavinandresen> jgarzik: I defer to your judgement on coinbaser, I don't care.
Quoted text (2 lines)
> And there is already buy-in from > other miners.
Then post data backing up that vague statement.
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 12:17:57 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
Quoted text (15 lines)
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote: > > On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 12:12:43 PM Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote: > >> > Accepted for 0.6: > >> > * 81807c3 (pull 719) Coinbaser > >> > >> This is not "accepted" as discussed yesterday on IRC. You need to > >> find buy-in from some other miners to make sure this is what "they" > >> want, rather than just what "you" want. > > > > It was per Gavin on IRC before yesterday. > > Quoting IRC yesterday, > <gavinandresen> jgarzik: I defer to your judgement on coinbaser, I don't > care.
[Friday, December 02, 2011] [1:57:14 PM] <gavinandresen> luke-jr: ok-- there seems to be general consensus to pull coinbaser for 0.6, so I'll probably pull it before op_eval and rework the op_eval code to use coinbaser.
Quoted text (3 lines)
> > And there is already buy-in from other miners. > > Then post data backing up that vague statement.
At least Eclipse (235 GH/s) is using it, and slush (1.3 TH/s) intends to.