💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "refactor: Remove C-style const-violating cast, Use reinterpret_cast":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28127#issuecomment-1648205184)
Thanks, addressed both comments by reviewers.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Rework validation logic for assumeutxo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27746#discussion_r1272483470)
The blocks being marked `ASSUMED_VALID` have their `nStatus` completely reset to the expected values for assumed valid, which includes the omission of `HAVE_DATA`.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Rework validation logic for assumeutxo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27746#issuecomment-1648224098)
ACK 137762f34a845e491b80f9cea07efc4427cb38bf

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "refactor: Remove C-style const-violating cast, Use reinterpret_cast"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28127#pullrequestreview-1543851558)
re-ACK fa9108f85afdc926fd6a8b96cc2acff7ca25d7a8.

💬 darosior commented on pull request "refactor: Remove C-style const-violating cast, Use reinterpret_cast":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28127#issuecomment-1648234604)
re-utACK fa9108f85afdc926fd6a8b96cc2acff7ca25d7a8

💬 hebasto commented on issue "ci: Future of macOS and Windows MSVC CI tasks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28098#issuecomment-1648237622)
> If the goal is to stay on a free plan, I think the only option is GitHub Actions CI.

GitHub Actions: [2000](https://github.com/pricing) minutes/month

CircleCI: [6000](https://circleci.com/pricing/) minutes/month

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "Support JSON-RPC 2.0 when requested by client":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27101#issuecomment-1648237927)
Rebased on master to re-apply scripted diff

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#discussion_r1272503501)
Done

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#discussion_r1272503610)
done

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#discussion_r1272503697)
done

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#issuecomment-1648248277)
Touched up all the nits, also rebased

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "rpc: show P2(W)SH redeemScript in getrawtransaction #27637":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27638#issuecomment-1648263090)
@Riahiamirreza are you still working on this?

💬 Riahiamirreza commented on pull request "rpc: show P2(W)SH redeemScript in getrawtransaction #27637":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27638#issuecomment-1648287923)
@pinheadmz Yes, but I have some difficulties in creating a transaction which spends from a P2SH to be able to view the structure of the transaction.

🤔 theuni reviewed a pull request: "kernel: Remove UniValue from kernel library"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28113#pullrequestreview-1543931377)
Concept ACK, but IMO the new helper is quite ugly and awkward :\

I left more specific comments/suggestions.

💬 theuni commented on pull request "kernel: Remove UniValue from kernel library":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28113#discussion_r1272543807)
Agree generally with @stickies-v. The optional param makes no sense because the caller... knows if it has a value :)

But that wonkiness aside, this is also now an outlier compared to the surrounding functions (though the param order is inconsistent among them, sigh):
```c++
[[nodiscard]] bool DecodeHexBlk(CBlock&, const std::string& strHexBlk);
bool DecodeHexBlockHeader(CBlockHeader&, const std::string& hex_header);
bool ParseHashStr(const std::string& strHex, uint256& result);
```

Lo
...

👍 stickies-v approved a pull request: "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#pullrequestreview-1543936443)
re-ACK 23c7b51ddd2888cf7fb260c439f004bd28768473

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "rpc: show P2(W)SH redeemScript in getrawtransaction #27637":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27638#issuecomment-1648360532)
There are some hints in `test/rpc_createmultisig.py` and probably a few other tests as well. I also tried to create a P2SH multisig and spend from it manually on regtest, it is quite involved...

https://gist.github.com/pinheadmz/2e85bbdd1b21ed2946f84a88d38f172a

👍 brunoerg approved a pull request: "test: cover addrv2 anchors by adding TorV3 to CAddress in messages.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27452#pullrequestreview-1544032294)
crACK ba8ab4fc545800c4fb283a5ff0b19138a0451aba

code lgtm!

🤔 jaonoctus requested changes to a pull request: "policy: Enable full-rbf by default"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#pullrequestreview-1544055502)
nACK

> That's 37% of total hash power regularly mining full-rbf transactions.

I think this decision is premature and that is not enough for the current value to be changed, honestly. Still prefer it as opt-in instead of enabled by default ATM

> Let's get this merged and this silly debate over with. Miners and node operators who choose to disable full-rbf still can with a simple configuration change.

Let's get this not merged and this silly debate over with. Miners and node operator
...

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "kernel: Remove UniValue from kernel library":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28113#issuecomment-1648426036)
Updated a3774d1b2a5ce9aa6d6d3cedc2c9b9a5d2f68240 -> 42233bea28f6f7c464f0cd6499d675e81b3e8512 ([kernelRmUnivalue_5](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/tree/kernelRmUnivalue_5) -> [kernelRmUnivalue_6](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/tree/kernelRmUnivalue_6), [compare](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/compare/kernelRmUnivalue_5..kernelRmUnivalue_6))

* Addressed @stickies-v's [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28113#discussion_r1272218244), pushing the handling
...