💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "policy: make pathological transactions packed with legacy sigops non-standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#issuecomment-3074256706)
utACK 2c2acb37ecdeed1582b9835f9075d44e313d787c

Easy to read and appears to comply with the BIP text. Logic seems sound, seems utterly unreasonable to make these kinds of transactions, and in general breaking up these types of transactions will result in transactions working again. This along with not seeing these on-chain for 10 years seems to suggest a minuscule confiscatory surface.

I'm still mulling over the larger accounting changes vs other possible tradeoffs, but this doesn't have to
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "policy: make pathological transactions packed with legacy sigops non-standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#issuecomment-3074275673)
re-ACK 2c2acb37ecdeed1582b9835f9075d44e313d787c

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "cluster mempool: add TxGraph work controls"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32263#pullrequestreview-3020830689)
Code review ACK 62ed1f92efff42bc79c50935e6dbd9da4e072020

Just a question and some nits.

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "cluster mempool: add TxGraph work controls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32263#discussion_r2207756051)
Why size two?
Isn't this supposed to be one? That is, individual splits are already optimal, but any component with size greater than one needs to be linearized, no?

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "cluster mempool: add TxGraph work controls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32263#discussion_r2207883583)
this is a duplication because `AddDependency` already made `real_is_optimal` to be `false`

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "cluster mempool: add TxGraph work controls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32263#discussion_r2207856137)
```suggestion
// Update the Cluster's quality if it has improved.
```

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "cluster mempool: add TxGraph work controls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32263#discussion_r2207935885)
yeah will make internal comments of `DoWork` easier to follow as well.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "cluster mempool: add TxGraph work controls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32263#discussion_r2207956569)
It's already will be in a topologically valid ordering, and there's only a single ordering possible in a connected component of size 2, thus optimal.

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "cluster mempool: add TxGraph work controls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32263#discussion_r2207967507)
Makes sense, I overlooked that even when parent pays for it self the ordering is the same.

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "wallet: Remove `upgradewallet` RPC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32944#discussion_r2207984864)
Done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32944/commits/305884c859f717a85f5bf9e728c6382d929fc01b

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "[BTC signet v22.0] websocket not working as expect"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32848)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "[BTC signet v22.0] websocket not working as expect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32848#issuecomment-3074364853)
Closing for now. Feel free to reopen, with all the required details and steps to reproduce.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "fix: Python 3 bytes comparison in linearize-data.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32978#issuecomment-3074369242)
Are there steps to reproduce, or a test to confirm the fix?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#issuecomment-3074385460)
Looking at logs, was wondering if we can get some more information about which peer/ which tx is being evicted from the orphanage? I'm eyeballing some logs since I've been running variants of this for a few weeks now, and the `orphanage overflow` string shows up significantly more often due to the non-timeout of announcements after this PR.

e.g.: "2025-07-07T11:27:34.481530Z [txpackages] orphanage overflow, removed 1 tx (4 announcements)"

Being able to quickly see that, f.e., the only reas
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add v3 transaction creation and wallet support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32896#discussion_r2208017260)
```suggestion
CMutableTransaction rawTx = ConstructTransaction(request.params[0], request.params[1], request.params[2], rbf, self.Arg<uint32_t>("version"));
```

nit: This should allow to drop the parsing in `ConstructTransaction` and the manual indexing here.

💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "Reduce minrelaytxfee to 100 sats/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3074405875)
Bitcoin Core

Nobody cares... We have better things.

💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "Reduce minrelaytxfee to 100 sats/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3074407862)
I dont need drama

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "ci: Use previous releases in tests on Windows"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32192)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "ci: Use previous releases in tests on Windows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32192#issuecomment-3074416760)
Fixed by #32219.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "test: bip324_tests & net_tests failure with `-O3 -flto`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32337)