01:22:10 <ooo123ooo1234567> <AmAguestHello> "this is prob a question for..." <- it isn't more complex than writing any other embedded software for a board with tight available resources. Are there a lot of users that need it ?
01:24:19 <ofrnxmr[m]1> If I recall correctly, trezor does the work in house / contracted.
01:24:19 <ofrnxmr[m]1> As a customer its best to ask trezor if they are, and if not, ask them to.
01:40:36 <ooo123ooo1234567> <AmAguestHello> "this is prob a question for..." <- hmm, judging by grant for another currency support it's more profitable to write firmware than cryptography. It's just a question of money
01:40:47 <ooo123ooo1234567> * of money, with proper reward they will implement even by themselves.
01:40:58 <ooo123ooo1234567> * of money, with proper reward they will implement it even by themselves.
16:09:42 <r4v3r23[m]> is there an update date for v0.18 release?
16:09:49 <r4v3r23[m]> s/update/updated/
16:12:03 <selsta> it would be best to do a meeting monday when most are back from monerokon
16:13:58 <selsta> like i said, i'm always available to do binaries. there is still a question on how to continue regarding multisig and ledger
16:19:41 <r4v3r23[m]> wasnt it agreed to merge 8149, mark is a experimental and disable it by default?
16:19:55 <r4v3r23[m]> s/is/as/, s/a//
16:21:46 <plowsof[m]> the only people who can use it are those who compile the master branch was the caveat? also to confirm: if binaries are released 'today' - trezor users are fine, but what happens to ledger users? can they not sign any transactions after the hard fork?
16:22:08 <selsta> agreed by who? 8149 isn't approved and the audit isn't done yet
16:22:29 <selsta> the audit should be done until monday
16:23:15 <selsta> plowsof[m]: trezor users can only make transactions once we merge the trezor integration, but the code is at least ready
16:23:24 <selsta> ledger users can't make any tx after the hardfork
16:24:07 <plowsof[m]> reg meetings: so ideally a meeting tomorrow? and another after the audit? tuesday/wednesday?
16:24:49 <selsta> monday
16:25:14 <r4v3r23[m]> selsta: from the logs of one of the hardfork mettings
16:25:19 <r4v3r23[m]> s/mettings/meetings/
16:25:35 <plowsof[m]> ErCiccione meeting tomorrow and on monday please? xD
16:25:45 <selsta> don't see the point in tomorrow
16:25:58 <selsta> people are at monerokon and i'm also not available
16:26:31 <plowsof[m]> right right ignore tomorrow
16:29:05 <selsta> r4v3r23[m]: it still requires an approval and ideally the audit, hopefully we are smarter by monday
16:37:09 <ofrnxmr[m]1> IIRC the options were... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/c9ce2c578f31747e17c99c038eda6e432b0276dc)
16:38:31 <ofrnxmr[m]1> Though, with 2 there is no reason to label experimental imo 
16:38:35 <selsta> I'm not going to merge it now if we have the audit in a couple days
16:53:27 <ofrnxmr[m]1> Audit good = merge... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/97225ef0dd02a901bf5c89981d341eef61335224)
16:54:02 <ofrnxmr[m]1> Something like that?
16:54:26 <selsta> that's what I want to discuss Monday, the audit should hopefully be done by then
17:03:39 <ofrnxmr[m]1> Ill likely stay out of the meeting, but I do think (if audit is delayed) we should ship so long as ooo is OKAY with shipping koes changes resulting from the initial review.
17:03:39 <ofrnxmr[m]1> Would be a roundabout way of doing things, but ultimately no different than if ooo made the review changes himself and we went without an audit.
17:03:39 <ofrnxmr[m]1> Just wanted to make my preference clear
17:05:16 <ofrnxmr[m]1> (Should only HF with old multisig if ooo doesnt agree to changes or if audit is bad or delayed) my non-technical opinion
21:31:54 <shayerhaver[m]> Now is your Bitcoin wallet or coinbase 0.00000 I promise 0.80500 in less than 24 hours without sending money to anyone. Earn 0.764 in 7hours, No referrals, No Ads, No scams. Ask how(me) 
21:31:54 <shayerhaver[m]> Or join https://t.me/+JdEg2rIn7E0wZDFk
21:32:40 <zord> shayerhaver[m]: how
21:33:26 <zord> I give you my coinbase login and you top it up with fullz?
21:33:45 <hyc> off topic for this channel
21:54:41 <ofrnxmr[m]1> <hyc> "off topic for this channel" <- ^ Scam / spam
21:54:41 <ofrnxmr[m]1> Kick/ban em
22:14:41 <kayabanerve[m]> ofrnxmr selsta 8149 alone isn't secure without a follow up PR by UkoeHB I don't believe they've created yet to address the leader burning bug. While I'd prefer 1, with that other PR, I'm personally leaning towards 4 with the unsafe label while we wait for the audit and then can re-introduce the follow up PR.
22:43:48 <neromm[m]> hey, I created completions (for fish shell) for monerod and monero-wallet-gui. I opened a PR with them (#8390 on core). Anyone here who uses fish could take a look at that? I put them in the contrib folder.
22:43:49 <neromm[m]> Also does it belong to the contrib folder or does it make sense to have it there in the code at all?
23:22:57 <jeffro256[m]> Yeah I agree with selsta. It makes more to put it in utils. The contrib folder (besides epee) is mostly compatibility, packaging, patches, etc 
23:26:02 <jeffro256[m]> Also do you know if these completions work with Bash also?
23:34:08 <jeffro256[m]> Also is this your first PR? If so, awesome !