✅ cmdruid closed a pull request: "[WIP] rpc: add `clearmempool` command for regtest mode"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32418)

🚀 glozow merged a pull request: "p2p: add more bad ports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32826)

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "rpc: add optional nodeid param to filter getpeerinfo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32741#discussion_r2175592013)
Only need to check `opt_peer_id` here, since we'd never get here if it's set to something different

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "rpc: add optional nodeid param to filter getpeerinfo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32741#discussion_r2175593570)
Since we have to iterate peers to find the right one, maybe this should be a list (unordered_set in C++)

🚀 glozow merged a pull request: "test: Turn util/test_runner into functional test"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32697)

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "mempool: Avoid needless vtx iteration during IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32827#discussion_r2175604578)
> which would need to be checked inside

Would that be after it's added to the queue already - which would kinda' defeat the purpose as far as I can tell :/

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "Shallow invalid forks + ActivateBestChainStep result in overly aggressive mempool filtering":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32838#issuecomment-3020279448)
Mabe we could create a `DisconnectedBlockTransactions` pool in `ActivateBestChain()` that is passed to each `ActivateBestChainStep()` instead of having a separate one in each `ActivateBestChainStep()` call, and then only call `MaybeUpdateMempoolForReorg` after `ABC` has made enough progress. We'd have to deal with blocks from multiple separate disconnections within one pool then (meaning duplicates/ possbile conflicts, because we could go into multiple forks, try to connect blocks, fail at some
...

📝 average-gary opened a pull request: "test: Enhance GetTxSigOpCost tests for coinbase transactions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32840)
Added assertions to the GetTxSigOpCost test cases to verify that the witness of a coinbase transaction is not considered in the signature operation cost calculations.

Using spendingTx.vin[0].prevout.SetNull() we create a coinbase transaction that evaluates to true for IsCoinbase(). Doing this to transactions (spendingTx in this case) that evaluate to a non-zero sigop output, we more concretely test that the witness of a coinbase transaction is not taken into account for SigOp maths.

------
...

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#pullrequestreview-2972293733)
I was experimenting with privacy on Bitcoin core and see this work.
Kudos 🎉 and thanks for your work to improve privacy

Great summary by @kdmukai

Did some manual tests on signet using the script provided; it was smooth on the happy path
<details>
<summary>See logs</summary>

```terminal
2025-06-30T17:06:38Z [privatebroadcast:info] P2P handshake completed, sending INV for txid=fdb1884dd42d940c3edd786487e45311a2d5f2328cf7349fa4ad5f29f5449c96, wtxid=862c319f69d047db646a375b2287a5116
...

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r2175685307)
This should be in doc?

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "wallet: Fix relative path backup during migration.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32273#discussion_r2175739001)
nit: extra line here?
```suggestion
assert_equal(magic, BTREE_MAGIC)

def test_blank(self):
```

🤔 ishaanam reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286#pullrequestreview-2972194802)
reACK 215e5999e2070a38c68e343c5c3f1dc37d567f58

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286#discussion_r2175625170)
In 5cc32ee2a7addb38ae4a4c97d306d0c5d9cc2d5e "test: Test for balance update due to untracked output becoming spendable"

very minor nit: it is not clear to me as to why the time needs to be moved forward for this test to be effective, so perhaps a sentence could be added to explain that?

🤔 w0xlt reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286#pullrequestreview-2972458146)
reACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286/commits/215e5999e2070a38c68e343c5c3f1dc37d567f58

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "threading: use correct mutex name in reverse_lock fatal error messages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32829#issuecomment-3020576505)
So one thing I noticed is that the tests passed, but the previous commit [85c2848](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32829/commits/85c2848eb575f4abaa81fdd4e8f3b2048693dd98) had failures but CI / test each commit (pull_request) passed

not sure this is a followup someone can look at to fix?

📝 instagibbs opened a pull request: "feature_taproot: sample tx version border values more"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32841)
Currently if the version 3 is selected for an otherwise standard spender, the test will fail. It's unlikely but possible, so change the test to update expectations and sample more aggressively on border values to instigate failures much quicker in the future if another version is made standard.

📝 theStack opened a pull request: "doc: add `/spenttxouts` to REST-interface.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32842)
Seems like adding the `spenttxouts` endpoint to the REST interface description was forgotten in #32540.

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286#discussion_r2176008565)
I agree that this part is pretty confusing, it's because a rescan timestamp of `now` means rescan all blocks from the MTP of the most recent block:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/6e5b67a370bbac16882938bf3f07af2519b4e9e7/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp#L378

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/6e5b67a370bbac16882938bf3f07af2519b4e9e7/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp#L383

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/6e5b67a370bbac16882938bf3f07af2519b4e9e7/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp#L399-L401

...

🤔 pablomartin4btc reviewed a pull request: "doc: add `/spenttxouts` to REST-interface.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32842#pullrequestreview-2972854934)
ACK dd99cedc0bfe7d7eee0f543bb27dab005c426c66

💬 murchandamus commented on issue "Cleanup CFeeRate constructor (sat/vB vs BTC/kvB)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/23129#issuecomment-3020948847)
@willcl-ark: I don’t think this is resolved. The state in `src/policy/feerate.cpp` still matches @maflcko’s comment from the linked PR that predates this issue by a day. I think #32750 is making some progress towards improvement, though.