✅ st3b1t closed a pull request: "rpc: append rpcauth.py hash in config and show pass"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27588)

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "fuzz: wallet, add target for `fees`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27647)
This PR adds fuzz coverage for `wallet/fees`. Some functions may use or not (non default) values from `wallet`, `CCoinControl` or `FeeCalculation`. So the logic is to make the test sometimes fill up some attributes and others no.

⚠️ Aminkavoos opened an issue: "I can take the lock on this issue?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27648)
I can take the lock on this issue?

_Originally posted by @vincenzopalazzo in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/23119#issuecomment-929591085_

✅ pinheadmz closed an issue: "I can take the lock on this issue?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27648)

🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "assumeutxo (2)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27596#pullrequestreview-1425210799)
I started testing this by creating / loading a snapshot on signet at height 100016. I haven't really looked at the code yet and also didn't read the provided docs so that I could do things by trial and error, and hopefully get to the desired result anyway but have a better chance to encounter some edge cases / bugs along the way.

Things worked really well! Just some observations / minor issues:
- Didn't encounter any problems with indexes, pruning, `-reindex` or `reindex-chainstate`
- In on
...

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "Relay own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27509#discussion_r1192851862)
Also, if you send the `INV` first and wait for a request to send the actual tx, you might be a little more confident that the peer you connected to is really relaying txs, not just gathering statistics.

I was thinking that you could send a fixed `VERSION` string and no feature messages (`WTXIDRELAY`, `SENDADDRV2`, etc), as a way of minimising how identifiable your node is versus other clients doing sensitive-relay. (I don't think you can have a larger anonymity set than that, since "send a si
...

💬 brunoerg commented on issue "Increase fuzz coverage in the wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27272#issuecomment-1546428911)
I'm working on increasing fuzz coverage in the wallet. Just to track:

- #27647 - for `wallet/fees` stuff
- #27585 - add more coverage for coin selection

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "I can take the lock on this issue?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27648)

⚠️ random9brat opened an issue: "BIP 39 words update"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27649)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.

Would it be possible to update bip39 words somehow to contain Serbian words (would be much useful for people from Balkan). I know this github is just btc repo but where would be the best place for this conversation to start?

### Is your feature related to a problem, if so please describe it.

Brain wallet would be much easier for at least 50.000.000 people (Balkans+outside who uses that language).

### Describe the solution you'd like

A
...

💬 achow101 commented on issue "BIP 39 words update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27649#issuecomment-1546495261)
Bitcoin Core does not support BIP 39. Discussion of changes to BIPs should be made on the [bitcoin-dev mailing list](https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev) or the [bips repo](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips).

✅ achow101 closed an issue: "BIP 39 words update"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27649)

⚠️ SharinganKazekage opened an issue: "Mine bitcoin using FPGA"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27650)
hey i have a project in university, is to create a fpga to mine bitcoin. Any idea where to start please?

💬 theochino commented on issue "Mine bitcoin using FPGA":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27650#issuecomment-1546539927)
https://youtu.be/y3dqhixzGVo

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Mine bitcoin using FPGA":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27650#issuecomment-1546541424)
Usually the issue tracker is used to track technical issues related to the Bitcoin Core code base. General bitcoin questions and/or support requests are best directed to the [Bitcoin StackExchange](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com) or the `#bitcoin` IRC channel on Libera Chat.

✅ MarcoFalke closed an issue: "Mine bitcoin using FPGA"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27650)

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "fuzz: wallet, add target for `fees`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27647#discussion_r1192929497)
Any reason to create a fresh wallet for each iteration? Should give more iter/second if this was static.

Also, could run `clang-format` to avoid the leading whitespace bloat?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "nested invalidate block doesn't work like I expect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10439#issuecomment-1546543076)
Ok, closing for now due to lack of interest, progress and direction.

Pull requests with improvements are always welcome. Moreover, it is possible to re-open this issue or create a new issue referencing it, if there is fresh interest.

✅ MarcoFalke closed an issue: "nested invalidate block doesn't work like I expect"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10439)

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Introduce field element and group element classes to test_framework/key.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26222#issuecomment-1546544187)
@real-or-random Makes sense, that simplifies some things too. Done.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: avoid sporadic MINIMALDATA failure in feature_taproot.py (fixes #27595)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27631#issuecomment-1546544317)
> This passes your example, and doesn't seem to break any other test.

Seems fragile to change a data structure with one-off code for a single test case. If the one-off special case is needed, it can be put into the test case itself.

💬 martinus commented on pull request "util: implement `noexcept` move assignment & move ctor for `prevector`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27334#discussion_r1192934995)
I think it's enough to have `other._size = 0;` because then `other.is_direct()` will return false and no free happens