💬 maflcko commented on pull request "doc: mention key removal in rpc interface modification":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32867#issuecomment-3068042014)
lgtm ACK e7b1c33b41334a9c2ce80033d92e3fac466eb70c

📝 w0xlt opened a pull request: "descriptor: don't underestimate the size of a Taproot spend (instead, overestimate it)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32964)
This PR revives #26573 since it has some ACKs and is labeled "Up for grabs".
I just added a comment explaining the behavior change.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "intermittent timeout in wallet_signer.py : 'createwallet' RPC took longer than 1200.000000 seconds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32855#issuecomment-3068068295)
Possibly similar root cause: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5280224666976256?logs=ci#L1710

At least on CI, back when I tested https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32529 by Mara did seem to improve the situation.

I wonder if we should re-open and use that pull, even if there isn't a reproducer or further details available.

⚠️ maflcko opened an issue: "Intermittent failure in rpc_invalidateblock.py assert_equal(self.nodes[0].getblockchaininfo()['headers'], 7) [ AssertionError: not(24 == 7)]"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32965)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/16238294537/job/45851271663?pr=32954#step:13:3105

```
test 2025-07-12T13:43:20.090739Z TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "D:\a\bitcoin\bitcoin\build\test\functional\test_framework\test_framework.py", line 195, in main
self.run_test()
~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^

...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[POC] ci: Skip compilation when running static code analysis":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32953#discussion_r2204014136)
this was done in the past, but it makes bisecting harder, because those images (and their package mirrors) quickly get deleted upstream

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: Avoid cd into build dir":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32880#issuecomment-3068102986)
> ACK [fa0eca8](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/fa0eca82ec1222ec1c68835ce7acdf9c8c4740ad), I have reviewed the code and it looks OK.

I think you reviewed a commit that still had the pre-existing $GOAL bug?

💬 delta1 commented on pull request "fix spelling in tor.md docs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32961#discussion_r2204019614)
I think this change would have to be upstream at [bitcoin-core/secp256k1](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1)

💬 delta1 commented on pull request "Reduce minrelaytxfee to 100 sats/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3068107508)
Concept ACK

🤔 stratospher reviewed a pull request: "test: headers sync timeout"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32677#pullrequestreview-3015110334)
ACK 11546183c70def6c0aa539642fd1c9ada3d46840. nice test!

💬 stratospher commented on pull request "test: headers sync timeout":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32677#discussion_r2204080826)
(just more style nits):

looks like there's a few more instances - ex: `announce_random_block` [cuts off in the middle](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/11546183c70def6c0aa539642fd1c9ada3d46840/test/functional/p2p_initial_headers_sync.py#L140).

also `announce_random_block` wasn't touched in the PR but seeing a diff for it. I think the general pattern in the codebase is to keep the helper functions before the respective `test_` function (see for example: `feature_fee_estimation.py`).
...

💬 Prabhat1308 commented on pull request "ci: Use optimized Debug build type in test-each-commit":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32888#issuecomment-3068203122)
re-ACK [`faa3171`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32888/commits/faa3171ff22fea1c001e5a9b01d964aa425a3387)

📝 Eunovo opened a pull request: "Silent Payments: Receiving"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32966)
This PR is part of integrating silent payments into Bitcoin Core. Status and tracking for the project is managed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28536
This PR is based on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28201 and will remain in draft until https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28201 is merged.

This PR:
- Adds a Silent Payments descriptor implemenation
- Adds a `SilentPaymentsDescriptorScriptPubKeyMan` Impl that is a subclass of `DescriptorScriptPubKeyMan`
- Implemen
...

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "[WIP] tracing: lock contention":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32952#issuecomment-3068449990)
a bit of feedback since you cc'd me:
- I'm not sure if opening this draft PR at this stage is worth it. There is nothing to experiment with, CI fails, and the feedback from the original PR is still a TODO. I'd recommend you finish your research first, come up with something that works, and then open a PR :)
- You are obviously free to work on this, and I'm sure it's interesting work, but I'm not sure if there is real developer interest for this feature. The original PR died down for a similar
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Wallet: don't underestimate the fees when spending a Taproot output":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26573#issuecomment-3068514231)
Picked up in #32964.

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "fix spelling in tor.md docs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32961#issuecomment-3068540101)
ACK 84ef5524d5abaf07cc9970f42e74ee15bd381e3d

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "contrib: Check build options for gen-manpages"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32949)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "contrib: Check build options for gen-manpages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32949#issuecomment-3068540607)
Thanks, but I'll close this for now:

* It is unclear how this fixes the issue, given that it about something else. Also, it is unclear what your goal is (try to fix the issue, or something else)
* It is unclear how this is different from `skip_missing_binaries`, which already exists.
* It is unclear how to test this, given that there are no steps to test.
* It is unclear how to review this, given that there is no description of the changes.

Feel free to work on this again, or anything e
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "fix spelling in tor.md docs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32961)

✅ yuvicc closed a pull request: "[WIP] tracing: lock contention"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32952)

💬 yuvicc commented on pull request "[WIP] tracing: lock contention":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32952#issuecomment-3068574786)

> I'm not sure if opening this draft PR at this stage is worth it. There is nothing to experiment with, CI fails, and the
> feedback from the original PR is still a TODO. I'd recommend you finish your research first, come up with something that > works, and then open a PR :)

I think you're right — I opened this draft PR a bit prematurely. I'll take your advice and focus on finishing my research and having something more concrete before opening this PR again.

Closing this for now. Thank
...