01:00:32 <lru> selsta: git clone https://github.com/monero-project/monero.git && cd monero && git submodule init && git submodule sync && git submodule update && git checkout v0.17.2.0 && git submodule update  # this fails, only --recursive on the update or the clone would fix it
01:01:20 <selsta> lru: you have to do ?git submodule sync`
01:01:26 <selsta> sorry, typo
01:01:36 <lru> I did, see above :-)
01:01:39 <selsta> you have to do `git submodule sync`after you checkout a branch / tag.
01:01:45 <selsta> not before
01:01:47 <lru> ok, let me try
01:02:34 <lru> yep, order matters, thanks
01:03:30 <selsta> `git submodule sync` and `git submodule update --init --force --recursive`  usually solve all submodule issues
01:04:18 <lru> I see the .gitmodules file changed between master and v0.17.2.0, which makes sync make sense now
01:05:28 <selsta> yep, we changed a submodule to upstream
05:01:30 <Lyza> <selsta> sometimes the window doesn't close; other times, if I leave it a few seconds, it "closes" but continues to run in the background
05:02:59 <Lyza> or if I click the 'x' button twice. I'm not sure how this user would have had an instance running unknowningly without something similar happening, but perhaps
05:25:55 <mj-xmr[m]> Lyza: It COULD be related to this, since you're talking about closing the app:
05:25:55 <mj-xmr[m]> https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/7859
05:26:01 <mj-xmr[m]> This and the linked PRs.
05:29:55 <mj-xmr[m]> I don't know how much into C++ you are, but destructors are being called when an application exits.
07:43:08 <mj-xmr[m]> And Undefined Behavior earns its name.
07:58:37 * mj-xmr[m] uploaded an image: (5KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/OpuZYtsdLmtuSCTAeYhHNUnC/image.png >
07:58:41 <mj-xmr[m]> <NikolaIgnatovNed> "stopwatch" <- Nice try.
12:48:06 <selsta> mj-xmr[m]: it's a GUI issue
13:07:27 <Lyza> "<mj-xmr[m]> I don't know how much into C++ you are" just enough to be dangerous :D
13:07:54 <Lyza> but yeah it's a GUI issue tho
14:25:42 <alex[m]123456721> https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/7889
14:43:24 <alex[m]123456721> ^ proposal on deprecating integrated addresses due to their bottlenecking of batching withdrawals and other reasons, comments would be appreciated.
15:00:17 <moneromoooo> Triptych embedded data could be used to store up to 3 of those per ring.
15:05:14 <UkoeHB> Isn't it only per tx?
15:13:35 <carrington[m]> +1 for anything which makes the network more homogenous
15:15:34 <selsta> IMO the major reason would be UX, the concept of integrated address is difficult to explain to new users
15:15:50 <selsta> especially when they send to an integrated address and the base address appears somewhere in the wallet and they think they sent to the wrong address
15:23:28 <sethsimmons> <selsta> "especially when they send to..." <- The UX for this is *awful* as a Ledger user.
15:23:40 <sethsimmons> The Ledger displays the non-integrated address, so it never matches.
15:24:07 <sethsimmons> I would love to see IAs deprecated/removed in favor of subaddresses once and for all.
15:32:33 <carrington[m]> As said in the github proposal, it probably makes sense to embed a "subaddress only" plan in with whatever the eventual "big ring upgrade" ends up beinh
15:32:56 <carrington[m]> As that will require big upgrades across the ecosystem regardless
15:56:54 <BusyBoredom[m]> I just finished making a payment processor for my website that uses integrated addresses, because I read that integrated addresses were the more performant option when tracking many payments as once. 
15:56:54 <BusyBoredom[m]> It was also easier to implement, because I didn't need to synchronize any counters between threads to keep track of which subaddresses are in use at any point in time. 
15:56:54 <BusyBoredom[m]> Do the downsides of integrated addresses outweigh these advantages? 
18:13:05 <alex[m]123456721> carrington: Seth your comments on the issue would be appreciated, otherwise it'll get lost in the noise.
18:13:13 <alex[m]123456721>  * carrington: Seth your comments on the github issue would be appreciated, otherwise it'll get lost in the noise.
18:13:23 <sethsimmons> Yes, sorry, will comment there!
18:24:20 <alex[m]123456721> > <@busyboredom:monero.social> I just finished making a payment processor for my website that uses integrated addresses, because I read that integrated addresses were the more performant option when tracking many payments as once.... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/7af556b6898aad446bc338d36216e64be02f22e6)
18:31:40 <BusyBoredom[m]> Fair enough, I'm happy to switch my project to subaddresses if that really is the recommended route now :) 
18:32:58 <BusyBoredom[m]> Or if it ends up being the recommended route
18:33:52 <moneromoooo> It is the recommended route, and has been since it appeared on mainnet.
19:07:02 <BusyBoredom[m]> Sounds good, subaddresses it is then. Side note then since it seems its info might be outdated, monerodocs is where I got my info when deciding whether to use integrated addresses or subaddresses: https://monerodocs.org/public-address/integrated-address/
23:50:11 <lru> is this normal: Exception: boost::wrapexcept<boost::bad_weak_ptr>
23:50:17 <lru> found in the logs