💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33629#discussion_r2448557622)
Done.

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33629#discussion_r2448561421)
Implemented this change in 1ae9fd3f7a4fddc786e9921e7fc2af41ab96bf9a. Should I try to squash this into place or is this fine as its own commit?

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33629#discussion_r2448565249)
Done.

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33629#discussion_r2448566519)
Done.

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "Add Labels/Groups to Output Descriptors"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21197)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Add Labels/Groups to Output Descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21197#issuecomment-3426969335)
Given that there are BIPS (38x) for this now, I think this is best discussed on the mailing list if it's still relevant.

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "Call interfaces::Wallet::getWalletTxs asynchronous"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20241)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Call interfaces::Wallet::getWalletTxs asynchronous":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20241#issuecomment-3426975295)
This issue hasn’t attracted much interest from other contributors in quite some time.

Given that, it doesn’t seem important enough to keep open indefinitely. I’m going to close it for now due to lack of activity, but pull requests or renewed discussion are always welcome.

Comment here if you think this should be re-opened.

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33629#discussion_r2448573573)
I took this change but I just realized that this is redundant with the first test that appears earlier in this function, right?

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "randomenv: remove some `/proc/` accesses":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32450#issuecomment-3427007466)
Not going to continue working on this.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "randomenv: remove some `/proc/` accesses"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32450)

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "Use muhash for assumeUTXO snapshot "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27669)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Use muhash for assumeUTXO snapshot ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27669#issuecomment-3427008540)
This issue hasn’t attracted much interest from other contributors in quite some time.

Given that, it doesn’t seem important enough to keep open indefinitely. I’m going to close it for now due to lack of activity, but pull requests or renewed discussion are always welcome.

Comment here if you think this should be re-opened.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "ASAN: turn on more not-enabled-by-default options"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33180)

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "ci: re-add Valgrind job to the CI"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33411)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci: re-add Valgrind job to the CI":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33411#issuecomment-3427016325)
Can leave it to *san for now.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "ci: add Valgrind fuzz"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33461)

👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "guix: Pointer Authentication and Branch Target Identification for aarch64 Linux"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24123)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Witness-Only Option for fundrawtransaction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25181#issuecomment-3427028015)
@TheBlueMatt is this still relevant for your use-case?

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "ci: use Mold linker for asan-lsan-ubsan-integer-no-depends-usdt workflow"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33370)