📝 yancyribbens opened a pull request: "test: add assertions to SRD max weight test"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33058)
Replace generic assertion with a result specific assertion showing the correctness of the solution found. If the max weight parameter is exceeded, the least valuable `UTXOs` are removed from the result. Therefore, only the most valued _encountered_ `UTXO's` are selected. While the smallest set would include all the most valued `UTXO's`, in the case of the test there is one high value `UTXO` that is never found before the target value is reached.

Correct the test comment to be more specific a
...

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "wallet: Set minversion to FEATURE_LATEST during migration"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33041)

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "test: add assertions to SRD max weight test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33058#issuecomment-3114358388)
cc @murchandamus

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: [refactor] Use info level for init logs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32967#discussion_r2229169977)
Slightly unrelated question: given that `WalletLogPrintf` calls `LogInfo` now
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0f86da382d3fdca6fc69ff277794acbc3f1e928d/src/wallet/wallet.h#L940-L943

(which was changed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/facbcd4cef8890ae18976fb53b67ea56b3c04454#diff-bf36b7865eb69d4b0a3576d830004933c82a795d3fd73c8073c11fc2e637a5c4R259-R261), I was wondering if this is the right time to rename the method as well. I don't mind if you think this isn't the place
...

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: [refactor] Use info level for init logs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32967#discussion_r2229196695)
nit, if you touch again, please consider adding braces here to avoid confusion

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: [refactor] Use info level for init logs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32967#discussion_r2229201811)
nit: the commit message claims `This refactor does not change behavior`, but we're removing a redundant space here, which could theoretically invalidate previous log parsers. It seems fine to me to do that, but we might want to mention it in the commit message.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: [refactor] Use info level for init logs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32967#discussion_r2229178343)
> The whole point of having log levels is that they are used correctly

I wasn't recommending any incorrect usage, was just wondering if it would simplify things if we migrated the warning/error logs before this PR, so that we can automate migration of all remaining ones and remove the `LogInfo` alias here. I'm also fine with it as is.

> If we do care, we should just review it

I'm not against this change, I just don't fully understand why some of the `LogPrintf` weren't migrated, e.g.
*
...

👍 l0rinc approved a pull request: "log: [refactor] Use info level for init logs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32967#pullrequestreview-3052616273)
ACK fa4002b3534fbd22a43b32cb24420652d12da6d2

🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "net, validation: don't punish peers for consensus-invalid txs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33050#pullrequestreview-3052706227)
> Because we do not discourage nodes for transactions we consider non-standard, we don't get any DoS protection from this check in adversarial scenarios.

Could you expand on the logic of this - is it just because the most effective DoS vectors known today happen to involve non-standard but valid transactions, or does this hold with more generality?
What if the current DoS vectors involving non-standard txs are fixed in the future, and the most-effective known DoS vectors then will involve co
...

👋 achow101's pull request is ready for review: "wallet: Add `exportwatchonlywallet` RPC to export a watchonly version of a wallet"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32489)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Add `exportwatchonlywallet` RPC to export a watchonly version of a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32489#issuecomment-3114420072)
All prerequisite PRs merged, ready for review.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "[29.x] final changes for v29.1rc1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33056#issuecomment-3114422676)
Looks good. Just need to `s/29.x/29.1rc1/` in `release-notes.md`. (i.e https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32480/commits/fdc629fa736d79f5b26a73fafc58f52c16d18f03).

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "test: add assertions to SRD max weight test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33058#issuecomment-3114425944)
All unit tests pass for me locally, so I'm not sure what CI is trying to tell me.

💬 b-l-u-e commented on issue "`combinepsbt` RPC does not work with P2TR inputs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27219#issuecomment-3114487702)
I've tested this issue with the current Bitcoin Core version 29 and can confirm that **the `combinepsbt` RPC now works correctly with P2TR inputs**.

## Test Results:

I created a test scenario with:
1. A Taproot address (`bcrt1ph7wt8kmwvp87hp0re43vvme8c3y8tyg49ghstkaufxs8qjf6j4hskqejs7`)
2. A PSBT spending a Taproot UTXO
3. Signed the PSBT using `walletprocesspsbt`
4. Combined the signed PSBT using `combinepsbt`
5. Finalized the combined PSBT using `finalizepsbt`

## Key Findings:

✅ **PSBT sig
...

📝 benthecarman opened a pull request: "Allow disabling default consistency checks on regtest"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33059)
This stems from a twitter conversation with @instagibbs and @stickies-v (https://x.com/Stphnvlstk/status/1948352236456714326). Currently trying to sync a 2.5M block regtest chain and its only done 1.3M headers in a few days. This adds the option to disable `fDefaultConsistencyChecks` so it can sync at a normal speed.

I am running this currently running this and it is infinitely faster and no longer using 100% CPU.

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "Allow disabling default consistency checks on regtest":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33059#issuecomment-3114567705)
I think you can just do `-checkblockindex=0`

💬 naiyoma commented on pull request "net: make m_mempool optional in PeerManager":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33029#discussion_r2229343188)
this wasn't intentional — I might have missed some changes since i rebased from the original branch.

💬 naiyoma commented on pull request "net: make m_mempool optional in PeerManager":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33029#discussion_r2229351697)
I have added it back

✅ benthecarman closed a pull request: "Allow disabling default consistency checks on regtest"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33059)

💬 benthecarman commented on pull request "Allow disabling default consistency checks on regtest":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33059#issuecomment-3114594417)
> I think you can just do `-checkblockindex=0`

ah missed that, thank you!