👍 rkrux approved a pull request: "doc: update multisig tutorial to use multipath descriptors"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33286#pullrequestreview-3303358609)
crACK 2a46e94

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "doc: Add `INSTALL.md` to Linux release tarballs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33451#issuecomment-3370478414)
@janb84 you'll need to guix build a binary from a commit post #33434 (or for v30 with #33473 checked out)

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "Clear out space on GHA jobs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33514#discussion_r2405334760)
Yeah I don't have much of an opinion on whether

> nit: Could run it for all tasks, to avoid having to select them individually?

OK I took this suggestion in 825f2e4a152301d757be8b02820d8679b69e134b as the future-proofing/churn-reduction seems worth it.

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "Clear out space on GHA jobs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33514#discussion_r2405343162)
Removed line altogether as we now run on all jobs on GHA

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "doc: Add `INSTALL.md` to Linux release tarballs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33451#pullrequestreview-3303526064)
(re) ACK 0fe7d552ab213065b8d5807c3dd9f4e976717529

retested on Debian 13 / Xfce with recent guix build of master (a33bd767a37d)
(No need for libxcb-cursor anymore)

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "Release: 30.0rc3 translations update"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33541#pullrequestreview-3303538177)
ACK 71ee0163dedd28327993415120e864253b127f8e

Did some spot checks with a translator/llm. All checked-out ✅

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "doc: update multisig tutorial to use multipath descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33286#issuecomment-3370664740)
utACK 2a46e94a1600a4f28e01db23a89f039acaa2c45e

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "Release: 30.0rc3 translations update"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33541)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "[30.x] Backports & rc3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33473#issuecomment-3370701596)
> Can you add #33229?

I'm not going to add that here, `rc3` is already late. There might be more multiprocess backporting done, so it could be included there, but that's also blocked on at least https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/222.

⚠️ hodlinator opened an issue: "HeadersSync tracking issue"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33547)
End Goal: Make the headers sync phase quicker and less prone to fail, while improving implementation and test code.

The Bitcoin Optech Podcast episode for Newsletter 322 (https://bitcoinops.org/en/podcast/2024/10/01/) among other things prompted the (re)discovery of the possible improvement of caching headers so they only needed to be downloaded once. To avoid adding unnecessary resource demands on nodes, the number of `HeaderSyncState` instances created over time should ideally be made more pr
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "[30.x] Backports & rc3"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33473)

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "doc: add coverage instrumentation hint to libFuzzer quickstart"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33536#pullrequestreview-3303634902)
NACK [Developer notes](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/developer-notes.md#compiling-for-fuzz-coverage) already has an extensive section on generating coverage. Maintaining the same documentation in 2 places is not ideal.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "doc: add coverage instrumentation hint to libFuzzer quickstart":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33536#discussion_r2405551412)
not sure about recommending libfuzzer here. It has issues properly counting runs, so coverage will be off. See also https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/a33bd767a37dccf39a094d03c2f62ea81633410f/contrib/devtools/deterministic-fuzz-coverage/src/main.rs#L111-L115

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3370903483)
@jesterhodl
> I resolved the 22 issues listed in the Polish translation

Thank you for your contribution! The updated Polish translation has been fetched from Transifex in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33541.

💬 mikekelly commented on issue "v30rc2 createrawtransaction unable to create txns with multiple OP_RETURNs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33544#issuecomment-3370911419)
> Here's the offending lines
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/30.x/src/rpc/rawtransaction_util.cpp#L109-L111

@maflcko this is all that needs removing and replacing with a warning. I assume there are standardness tests that will start failing and need changing too. Not sure if I'll have time to get to this myself. Also concerned there may be dragons here and it's not as simple as it appears - what do you think @petertodd or @murchandamus ?

💬 maflcko commented on issue "v30rc2 createrawtransaction unable to create txns with multiple OP_RETURNs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33544#issuecomment-3370947247)
There is https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32790/files, but it is still in draft and has not received any code-review, only a conceptual feedback.

💬 frankomosh commented on pull request "doc: add coverage instrumentation hint to libFuzzer quickstart":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33536#discussion_r2405646510)
thanks. wasn't aware of the run counting issues with LibFuzzer.

So I guess the best approach is to build without the fuzzer sanitizer ?

💬 frankomosh commented on pull request "doc: add coverage instrumentation hint to libFuzzer quickstart":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33536#issuecomment-3370955199)
> NACK [Developer notes](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/developer-notes.md#compiling-for-fuzz-coverage) already has an extensive section on generating coverage. Maintaining the same documentation in 2 places is not ideal.

ok .
Would you atleast like to see a reference to the developer notes in this section(assume for someone who lands here first)?

💬 mikekelly commented on pull request "rpc, test: allow multiple data outputs in `createrawtransaction` & `createpsbt`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32790#issuecomment-3370956828)
@yuvicc FYI - there are failing checks on this. If you make this build green then it could be proposed as part of v30 release.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Release Schedule for 30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32275#issuecomment-3370962466)
An `rc3` has been tagged: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v30.0rc3.