💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1293973655)
Changed these to `if(!Assume(...)) return;`

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1293972937)
Thanks, fixed

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1272492061)
Dropped the commit instead

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1293973180)
Fixed

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1272428700)
Removed the prefix

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1272426199)
Good point. The reason for excluding orphanage is actually not applicable yet so I have dropped it for now.

This is really only applicable when we are requesting the `ancpkginfo` for a tx. We want to exclude orphanage because otherwise, `AlreadyHaveTx` will return true and we will never request `ancpkginfo`s.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1293974858)
Replaced the exposure of `Count` to `CheckIsEmpty()` functions

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1293978623)
Added `MEMPOOLREJ` log and successful `AcceptToMemoryPool` log for both orphan and non-orphan tx results.

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "fuzz: improve `coinselection`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1293979442)
I checked that 1ṩ may break `assert(result_bnb->GetChange(coin_params.m_cost_of_change, CAmount{0}) == 0);`

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1293981371)
This is gone now, replaced with registration of `ConnectionInfo` when the node first connects.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Package Relay 1/3: Introduce TxPackageTracker as Orphan Resolution Module":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28031#discussion_r1293981811)
Removed the special casing. I can't remember why it comes into play later, but if I do, I'll add it when it's needed.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Break up script/standard.{h/cpp}":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28244#discussion_r1293985018)
leaving as is since it is only moved.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Break up script/standard.{h/cpp}":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28244#discussion_r1293997139)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Break up script/standard.{h/cpp}":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28244#discussion_r1293997252)
Added comment as suggested

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Break up script/standard.{h/cpp}":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28244#discussion_r1293997485)
Cherry picked 461259c4ecc1e48d028eaea56061e72a6667ce4f from #26291

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Break up script/standard.{h/cpp}":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28244#discussion_r1293997590)
Dropped the reference

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Break up script/standard.{h/cpp}":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28244#discussion_r1293997660)
Dropped those comments.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Break up script/standard.{h/cpp}":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28244#issuecomment-1678113685)
> Did you use some script for [b3af9ce](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/b3af9cea5806d26dc3e8f397a1de870065611648)?

Ran IWYU with manual cleanup.

💬 Retropex commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#discussion_r1294000727)
@jonatack Do I have to add other elements?

💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "fuzz: improve `coinselection`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1294000827)
Ah, my bad, I thought this target referred to the sum of recipient outputs, but it’s actually `recipient_sum + not_input_fees`.

Is it possible that this then would need to be at least as large as the cost for the header + change output? 1000 ṩ/vB might not be enough for every feerate then.