💬 jonatack commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#discussion_r1294027661)
The note should probably refer to the `-permitbaremultisig` configuration option.

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#pullrequestreview-1577754051)
Rebased on top of #28251 (which also knocked out 2 commits) and addressed comments

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294031657)
Added that to the comment :+1:

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294032183)
Yeah agreed, makes it much more important that there isn't e.g. a crash bug in there somewhere, and if anything goes wrong we should quit gracefully and default to topo sort.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294039201)
Added comment

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294039095)
Imo it's fine, since we don't really do anything with it.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294038854)
Renamed to `FilteredAncestorSet` and `FilteredAncestorFeeAndVsize`

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294033483)
Fixed

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294039773)
Added to the comment

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294039154)
Refined the comment

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294033351)
Done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1294044001)
comment has been removed

💬 Retropex commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#discussion_r1294052366)
Updated.

💬 Retropex commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#issuecomment-1678214325)
@MarcoFalke I will try to make a summary shortly.

💬 Rlavington commented on issue "Make it very obvious to the new people that the Bitcoin Core program first needs to be installed and run on the "C" drive. ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28268#issuecomment-1678258651)
> > I guess your issue is about the GUI choose-direcory dialog?
>
> FWIW, this dialog is enabled by default during the first run of the Bitcoin Core GUI.

Yes, it does. However, I made the mistake of having the Bitcoincore Program on the HDD itself.

When it should have been on the "C" drive of the computer, with the OS as well.

Then I have the option of syncing the Bitcoin data onto another drive. So that I'm not using up all of the space on the "C" drive.

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "fuzz: improve `coinselection`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27585#discussion_r1294081372)
Nice, will leave it running tonight with some values (1000, 5000, etc) to check it as well.

💬 russeree commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#issuecomment-1678276048)
Should the status of BIP11 be changed upon merge as well since it would no longer be applicable to Bitcoin? Does a new BIP need to be constructed to obsolete BIP11?

💬 russeree commented on issue "Make it very obvious to the new people that the Bitcoin Core program first needs to be installed and run on the "C" drive. ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28268#issuecomment-1678282526)
> Yes, it does. However, I made the mistake of having the Bitcoin core Program on the portable HDD itself.

Bitcoin Core was still able to run from your external HDD/SSD correct?

💬 Symphonic3 commented on pull request "policy: Enable full-rbf by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1678283404)
@iBeizsley @Daniel600 I think it's worth noting that what's being argued here is **NOT** any less of a choice for users than disabling full-rbf by default. The decision is made for the user no matter what the default is. Inaction does not equate to not making a decision. It is not possible for a setting to be "unset" by default, it must either be off or on.

Bitcoin Core's policy has been against transaction censorship; there is a reason why tools like ordisrespector will not and should not ma
...

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "Wallet : Allow user to navigate options while encrypting at creation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/722#issuecomment-1678296287)
re-ACK https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/commit/78660e72001a2561c7ad3026367a69f65414dbd9 as previously [here](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/722#pullrequestreview-1414865992).