💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "wallet: Remove `CWallet::nWalletVersion` and several related functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977#discussion_r2208180979)
Done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/fc4d563edb5feab273e5770f1b369cb6fe8a0c8c

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "wallet: Remove `CWallet::nWalletVersion` and several related functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977#discussion_r2208183447)
Done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977/commits/269c43bdb04768954e59119363afdfa061849ed0

💬 enirox001 commented on pull request "test: Fix reorg patterns in tests to use proper fork-based approach":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32587#issuecomment-3074636173)
Code review and tested ACK

This PR looks good to me. The approach to modularize the reorg method and improve the reorg behavior is well thought out and implemented.

- **da836ca**: Move to the `blocktools.py` file done well - this makes it easier to reuse across multiple files
- **3afc731**: Reorg behavior changed in the respective files matches real-world behavior as opposed to the previous implementation

I do have a question regarding some duplication:

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "wallet: Remove `CWallet::nWalletVersion` and several related functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977#discussion_r2208185081)
Done in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977/commits/8462d84c596315d1979d26b964657079ed5bc09b

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "wallet: Remove `CWallet::nWalletVersion` and several related functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977#discussion_r2208190100)
In this case, it needs to be removed. Since the wallet version is no longer loaded from the database file, this record no longer appears in the log.

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "wallet: Remove wallet version and several legacy related functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977#issuecomment-3074653838)
@pablomartin4btc thanks for the detailed review. I've addressed all your comments.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#issuecomment-3074663577)
> Looking at logs, was wondering if we can get some more information about which peer/ which tx is being evicted from the orphanage?

Will add to the followup. What about adding a log for each peer chosen in the loop? So for example 1 call to `LimitOrphans`:
```
[txpackages] peer=25 orphanage overflow, removed 4 announcements
[txpackages] peer=177 orphanage overflow, removed 1 announcements
[txpackages] peer=25 orphanage overflow, removed 1 announcements
[txpackages] orphanage overflow,
...

💬 Galoretka commented on pull request "fix: Python 3 bytes comparison in linearize-data.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32978#issuecomment-3074833379)
> Are there steps to reproduce, or a test to confirm the fix?

The change is necessary because, in Python 3, indexing a bytes object returns an integer, not a single-character string. For example:
> ```python
> b"\0"[0] == "\0" # always False in Python 3
> b"\0"[0] == 0 # True
> ```
So, the previous comparison would never detect a null byte as intended.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "doc: clarify note about backup after migratewallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32956#issuecomment-3074847514)
I don't see why this is needed. There is are already more specific instructions about the backup file in the previous paragraph. The term "backup" already implies that it will not be changed.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "fix: Python 3 bytes comparison in linearize-data.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32978#issuecomment-3074852568)
I was asking about an end-to-end test, like test/functional/feature_loadblock.py or by calling linearize-data.py manually

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "doc: clarify note about backup after migratewallet"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32956)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "doc: clarify note about backup after migratewallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32956#issuecomment-3074939631)
Agree.

Closing for now, but discussion can continue.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Remove wallet version and several legacy related functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977#discussion_r2208326435)
In dbf8dbf4b1792686be70050c3b19e477769d142b "wallet: Remove `CWallet::nWalletVersion` and related functions"

We still need to write the minversion record for newly created wallets so that they can be opened in older versions with the expected feature set.

💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "Silent Payments: Receiving":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32966#issuecomment-3075063066)
Thanks for the reviews @josibake and @Sjors . I am currently travelling, and I will get to them later in the week.

📝 puchu opened a pull request: "set min tx fee to 100sat/kvB"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32982)
as the price of bitcoin rose and the mempool is already filled with 100sat/kvB txs, accept this reality and reflect the change in the current policy/code

✅ pinheadmz closed a pull request: "set min tx fee to 100sat/kvB"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32982)

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "set min tx fee to 100sat/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32982#issuecomment-3075161914)
closing as duplicate of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "wallet: Remove `upgradewallet` RPC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32944#discussion_r2208459894)
nit (only if you have to re-touch): sorry, my bad, missed the "-" (bullet point) in my previous suggestion but I think that will be added during the release process if there are more updates on RPCs.
```suggestion
- `upgradewallet` has been removed. It was unused and only applied to unsupported legacy wallets.
```

👍 pablomartin4btc approved a pull request: "wallet: Remove `upgradewallet` RPC"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32944#pullrequestreview-3021991698)
ACK d89c6fa4a71810cdb28395d4609632e1b22249b3

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "wallet: Remove wallet version and several legacy related functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32977#discussion_r2208482177)
Ok, perhaps we can rename the function to `SetInitialVersion`, `SetCompatibleVersion` or similar with a comment/ note about the intention. Is this something that needs to be kept forever or some "deprecation" case?