💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Introduce secp256k1 module with field and group classes to test framework":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26222#discussion_r1207999486)
never mind, just reviewed key.py and saw how this is being used in `verify_schnorr`, `tweak_add_pubkey`. agree that it's better/simpler to keep it as it is.

💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Introduce secp256k1 module with field and group classes to test framework":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26222#discussion_r1207758013)
I thought of "The result is cached." as:
1. someone calls `int()`
2. we do operations inside `int()`, compute what num and den should be and store it locally+lazily without updating actual `self.num`, `self.den`
3. someone calls another FE function
4. the newly computed value of `self.num`, `self.den` gets actually updated only here

isn't this what caching a variable conceptually means? (even though it doesn't matter here where `self.num`, `self.den` gets actually updated) what did y
...

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "p2p: Diversify automatic outbound connections with respect to networks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27213#discussion_r1208033507)
Instead of pushing the node to `vNodes` and removing it if it's not routable, I think you could do something like:
```cpp
static void AddRandomOutboundPeer(NodeId& id, std::vector<CNode*>& vNodes, PeerManager& peerLogic, ConnmanTestMsg& connman, ConnectionType connType, bool onion_peer = false)
{
CAddress addr;

if (onion_peer) {
auto tor_addr{g_insecure_rand_ctx.randbytes(ADDR_TORV3_SIZE)};
BOOST_REQUIRE(addr.SetSpecial(OnionToString(tor_addr)));
}

wh
...

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: when a block is disconnected, update transactions that are no longer conflicted":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27145#issuecomment-1565503469)
Ok nice, great. Thanks for the details.
We should code a test exercising exactly that behavior.

👍 furszy approved a pull request: "wallet: when a block is disconnected, update transactions that are no longer conflicted"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27145#pullrequestreview-1447436505)
Tested ACK 89df7987

> For example, let's say that Alice has a utxo. She creates a transaction, tx1, spending this utxo to Bob. AddToSpends will get called on Bob's node for this transaction, because Bob is the recipient. Alice then creates a conflicting transaction to tx1, called tx2, which sends the funds back to herself. However, Bob's node does not call AddToSpends on tx2, because Bob is not the recipient. If tx2 gets mined, but then that block is disconnected from our node, Bob's mapTxSpe
...

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet: when a block is disconnected, update transactions that are no longer conflicted":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27145#issuecomment-1565558335)
> Would be good to have a real functional test in the future.

#27307 tests this behavior, which is how I found this bug.

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "wallet: when a block is disconnected, update transactions that are no longer conflicted"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27145)

💬 amitiuttarwar commented on pull request "p2p: Diversify automatic outbound connections with respect to networks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27213#discussion_r1208070951)
great feedback! that's much cleaner. incorporated in the latest push

💬 RandyMcMillan commented on pull request "Mask values on Transactions View":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/708#issuecomment-1565610693)
ACK 4492de1be11f4131811f504a037342c78f480e20

post merge ACK

Great job!

https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/701#issuecomment-1401350037

💬 recursive-rat4 commented on issue "Allow accepting non-standard transactions on mainnet via local rpc":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27768#issuecomment-1565665282)
>The scenario that I have in mind though is alternative transport mechanisms for bitcoin transactions that exist outside the p2p network and that are publicly accessible. Miners are incentivised to pull out of that source, and therefore regular nodes should do that too to keep their mempool as much in sync as possible?

Miner's incentives are more complex than simply put into blockchain anything that pays a satoshi. One may end up in a situation where mempool is filled up with a type of non-st
...

💬 furszy commented on pull request "Fix rpc_getblockfrompeer intermittency by introducing 'getblockfileinfo' RPC command":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27770#issuecomment-1565677870)
> Not sure. My preference would be to figure out why the blocks are of different size and then make that deterministic instead.

I started there but.. do we really care? (aside from dev curiosity, where I agree that wouldn't be bad to know why).

The test goal is to exercise `getblockfrompeer` and not pruning nor where blocks are stored. Having all those hardcoded heights, expecting to have a precise number of blocks in each block file, looks quite fragile.

I mean, all the hardcoded `prun
...

💬 aureleoules commented on pull request "ci: Add test coverage job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27547#discussion_r1208175632)
Done thanks

💬 aureleoules commented on pull request "ci: Add test coverage job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27547#issuecomment-1565723181)
> Does this mean codecov can push changes to pull request or just that it can comment?

It seems that the permissions for "Pull request" are the following: https://docs.github.com/en/rest/overview/permissions-required-for-github-apps?apiVersion=2022-11-28#pull-requests

So I don't think Codecov is able to push to PRs.

🤔 Ronnie6464 requested changes to a pull request: "wallet: ensure the wallet is unlocked when needed for rescanning"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26347#pullrequestreview-1447762843)
No

👋 ishaanam's pull request is ready for review: "wallet: track mempool conflicts with wallet transactions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27307)

👍 Ronnie6464 approved a pull request: "wallet: ensure the wallet is unlocked when needed for rescanning"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26347#pullrequestreview-1447804625)
[]()

💬 Ronnie6464 commented on pull request "wallet: ensure the wallet is unlocked when needed for rescanning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26347#discussion_r1208270533)
- **[]()
```suggestion
encrypted_wallet.sethdseed(seed=hd_seed)_[]()

_
```
**

💬 Ronnie6464 commented on pull request "wallet: ensure the wallet is unlocked when needed for rescanning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26347#discussion_r1208269643)
Ronowens6565@gmail.com

💬 Ronnie6464 commented on pull request "wallet: ensure the wallet is unlocked when needed for rescanning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26347#discussion_r1208269963)
N[]()

💬 Ronnie6464 commented on pull request "wallet: ensure the wallet is unlocked when needed for rescanning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26347#issuecomment-1565820325)
> Wallet passphrases are needed to top up the keypool of encrypted wallets
> during a rescan. The following RPCs need the passphrase when rescanning:
> - `importdescriptors`
> - `rescanblockchain`
>
> The following RPCs use the information about whether or not the
> passphrase is being used to ensure that full rescans are able to
> take place (meaning the following RPCs should not be able to run
> if a rescan requiring the wallet to be unlocked is taking place):
> - `walletlock`
>
...