💬 sr-gi commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3246305675)
I've reviewed the Catalan version (and updatred) the Catalan version issues, plus a few more pending strings

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "Add functional test for IPC interface"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33201#pullrequestreview-3177614507)
re ACK 235016f5b78ba9f472b56df0825690307fffc7e6

changes since last ACK:
- Rebase
- Fixes for macOS native job (pip -> pip3)
- Added IPC interface tests to more hosts.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Add functional test for IPC interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33201#discussion_r2316809613)
I found it logistically simpler to give each their own, as otherwise all the test need to run within a single `asyncio.run(capnp.run(...))`.

💬 AO-LocLab commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3246344948)
The LLM check is an interesting tool that we should definitely use. However, language coordinators and translators should not just apply the LLM’s suggestions as they can be misleading. It can miss the nuances and claim the translation is wrong. It also sometimes misses the context. Like anything AI powered, a great tool to use when properly checked by a human.
I have addressed the errors that need to be in the Fr translation :)

🤔 l0rinc reviewed a pull request: "Release: 30.0 translations update"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#pullrequestreview-3177636174)
Left some notes for the Hungarian translations, they're mostly ok (though they all sound very mechanical), there's one definite mistake and a few ones where the previous one was better

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#discussion_r2316822016)
the previous one was correct:
```suggestion
<translation type="unfinished">Tárca megnyitása</translation>
```

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#discussion_r2316825223)
previous one was better

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#discussion_r2316828200)
this is incorrect, `cím` is `address`:
```suggestion
<translation type="unfinished">A jelenleg kiválasztott aláírás másolása a vágólapra</translation>
```

⚠️ instagibbs opened an issue: "GUI (?): Copying output from console causes large mem usage/OOM"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33285)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [x] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

Running the GUI on mainnet, I open the console, run:

`getblocktemplate '{"rules": ["segwit"]}'`

everything acts normally until then. If I then try to copy the test, memory usage blows out:

on release build, jumps from <2GB to >7GB memory

on debug build, it jumps to dozens of GB, often causing OOM and kills the process.



### Expected behaviour

I expect the memory usage to not blow up
...

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28676#discussion_r2316855727)
I believe the ancestor and descendant count limits are still used by the wallet when using `-walletrejectlongchains`, which makes sense for at least a couple of releases after cluster mempool is released while there may still be a lot of nodes running with ancestor/descendant limits in place. So I think these variables should stay for now, perhaps I can add a comment mentioning all this so someone remembers to get rid of these later.

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2316892720)
nit: perhaps it makes review easier.

```suggestion
fromme_wallet = self.nodes[0].get_wallet_rpc("fromme")
```

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3246455241)
> Left some notes for the Hungarian translations, they're mostly ok (though they all sound very mechanical), there's one definite mistake and a few ones where the previous one was better

Mind adjusting the mentioned translations on Transifex directly?

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#discussion_r2316999726)
Fixed in Transifex, please close

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#discussion_r2316999945)
reverted in Transifex

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#discussion_r2317001048)
Fixed

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3246578829)
I have adjusted and finished the remaining ones in Hungarian.
I have tried if other languages help with the context (as suggested in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3246189935) and the translations were pretty spon-on this way, e.g.
```
_msg1037
• Source (en): Option '-checkpoints' is set but checkpoints were removed. This option has no effect.
Context:
• fr: L’option « -checkpoints » est activée, mais les points de contrôle ont été supprimés. Cette option n’a
...

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "mini miner: enable `Linearize` return package feerates":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33216#discussion_r2317014897)
I think the variable name is descriptive enough hence no need for a comment.

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "Wallet: Add `maxfeerate` wallet startup option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29278#discussion_r2317052580)
> I’d be surprised if we don’t have a test for that already.

Yes we do :)

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "mini miner: enable `Linearize` return package feerates":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33216#discussion_r2317054430)
Done.

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "cluster mempool: control/optimize TxGraph memory usage"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33157#pullrequestreview-3177972691)
Concept ACK to have control over memory usage, also not suprised by the numbers because of the added complexity of cluster mempool v master.