💬 fanquake commented on pull request "[29.x] Backport logging ratelimiting":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33225#discussion_r2423424121)
@Crypt-iQ It's still fine to open a PR against 29.x to adjust this.

⚠️ fanquake reopened an issue: "ci: remove third-party javascript usage from Windows CI"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32508)
See:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/c779ee3a4044df3a263394bbb8b104aeeaa7c727/.github/workflows/ci.yml#L189-L190

We shouldn't need to use a third-party repo, that runs some Javascript, to configure a command prompt. The comment in our code also doesn't explain why this is necessary. We should be able to drop this dependency.

Also discussed in #32396.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Release Schedule for 30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32275#issuecomment-3394088606)
Binaries are available: https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-30.0/
Website has been updated: https://bitcoincore.org/en/releases/30.0/

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[29.x] Backport logging ratelimiting":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33225#discussion_r2423464895)
Could do it for master and backport?

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Intermittent CI network issue downloading assets.json from GitHub":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33599#issuecomment-3394123866)
I guess the IPs are detected as and blocked as "LLM scrapers". Possible workarounds could be:

* Use a mirror/proxy to download the json file
* Use a git clone (sparse), which may not be rate limited

📝 prusnak opened a pull request: "contrib: add desktop file"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/902)
from https://github.com/bitcoin-core/packaging

=> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/packaging/blob/main/debian/bitcoin-qt.desktop

this simplifies packaging, because currently one needs to fetch a desktop file from another repo instead of using just the main source code one

💬 sipa commented on pull request "txgraph: randomize order of same-feerate distinct-cluster transactions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33335#issuecomment-3394366181)
Rebased on #33157, as it looks that's close.

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "miner: empty mempool special case for waitNext()"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33566#pullrequestreview-3328593103)
ACK 2e8fff3f17366e9c2ba054023ad8bd89ac51d584

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "[IBD] coins: increase default UTXO flush batch size to 32 MiB"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31645#pullrequestreview-3328689546)
ACK b6f8c48946cbfceb066de660c485ae1bd2c27cc1

I don't think complicating this with a dynamic calculation makes sense either given the trade offs documented in this discussion.

🤔 hebasto reviewed a pull request: "ci: Use native platform for win-cross task"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33558#pullrequestreview-3328936219)
> * Unlock the CI task to run on riscv64 at all

Isn't this relevant to other tasks as well, for example, `ci/test/00_setup_env_arm.sh`?

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "ci: Use native platform for win-cross task"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33558#pullrequestreview-3329020667)
ACK fa6fd16f36e1240cda58a46e1717b02e8d3172a3, tested on Ubuntu 24.04, RISC-V.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: fix `cachedCoinsUsage` accounting in `CCoinsViewCache`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32313#discussion_r2424497697)
We should try and insert a different `coin` at the same `outpoint`, like we do for the `AddCoin` test above. That way the below check `cache.AccessCoin(outpoint) == coin` makes sure the original `coin` emplaced was not overwritten by the second one.

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "refactor: Construct g_verify_flag_names on first use":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33600#issuecomment-3394837857)
ACK [faa9d10](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33600/commits/faa9d10c84bc6b465cbca266468990cc716b4300)

Looks good to me, makes sense to follow the construct on first use idiom.

I also did a quick grep to see if `g_verify_flag_names` was used anywhere else, and it was not

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "coins: fix `cachedCoinsUsage` accounting in `CCoinsViewCache`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32313#discussion_r2424544149)
Good idea, [done](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0d5f7d24bde2bcc2cf7345fa46cb84ac0ecec41f..24d861da7894add47747eff69dd3fc71fbcdd7d0)

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "argsman, cli: GNU-style command-line option parsing (allows options after non-option arguments)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33540#issuecomment-3394956274)
> * Is there a way to pass `bitcoin-cli` RPC arguments that begin with a `-` character?

At the moment, please correct me if I'm wrong, there's no or I haven't seen an RPC that would receive a valid argument that starts with `-` (but I understand it could be in the future), and there's no test for it otherwise I think the PR would have caught it.

Testing the scenario you mentioned in `master` would work like for example in:

```
./build_master/bin/bitcoin-cli -regtest -datadir=/tmp/b
...

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "doc: archive release notes for v30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33601#discussion_r2424672309)
you can drop `kevkevin` I think thats a duplicate for me

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "doc: archive release notes for v30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33601#discussion_r2424684332)
Like this? :p
```suggestion
- kevin
```

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "doc: archive release notes for v30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33601#discussion_r2424692750)
Haha just `kevkevinpal` works

💬 shyrwall commented on issue "Enable PCP by default?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31663#issuecomment-3395190327)
Bit late to add this but just saw it because of v30 so just wanted to comment. There are millions upon millions of, mostly chinese, routers out there that only supports UPnP.

For example, basically all of Thailands ISPs use routers from Fiberhome and Huawei. Mostly for PON-deployments. None of these supports anything other than UPnP. That's a single example of tens of millions of connections.

💬 kamol1988 commented on issue "Enable PCP by default?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31663#issuecomment-3395202500)
Yed