💬 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).

💬 iBeizsley commented on pull request "policy: Enable full-rbf by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1678303905)
> 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.

First seen is the existing default. I'm of the personal opinion it's probably a worse default in a vacuum, but the decision isn't being made in a vacuum, and changing defaults to influence policy toward personal preference, even if I'm confident i
...

💬 stratospher commented on pull request "crypto: BIP324 ciphersuite follow-up":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28267#discussion_r1294118466)
interesting, done.

💬 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-1678346222)
> > 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?

It was able to run yes.

However, it kept on wanting to re-sync up again from 0.0%

Even when the full block file of 530gb was already on the HDD.

It was as if it wasn't detecting that the full Bitcoin Blockchain was already there on the HDD.

But when I installed the Bitcoin Core program on to the "C" drive.
...

💬 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-1678354716)
So the issue originates with the default search location for the bitcoin.conf file. That file likely didn't contain the datadir flag when it was first installed to the external drive. By reinstalling to C: you triggered the prompt that requests location of the datadir and then writes that to bitcoin.conf after the confirm. As such after completing the dialog the location of your blocks was stored.

[See this wiki about the bitcoin data directory](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Data_directory)

A
...

💬 Symphonic3 commented on pull request "policy: Enable full-rbf by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132#issuecomment-1678354752)
> First seen is the existing default. I'm of the personal opinion it's probably a worse default in a vacuum, but the decision isn't being made in a vacuum, and changing defaults to influence policy toward personal preference, even if I'm confident in that preference, is quite different in my view to something being the default because there was not previously another option.

This philosophy is antithetical to any kind of development at all.

> It is not possible for a setting to be "unset"
...

💬 russeree commented on issue "Any JavaScript functional test for this repo?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28270#issuecomment-1678396749)
This would not be possible without a large refactor. The Bitcoin-core npm package is very good for communicating with the bitcoind server to run RPC commands, the internal testing suite of python code spins up various instances of bitcoind with different flags and executes commands against those instances.

All in all the npm Bitcoin core package would not be a good candidate as a wrapper for test_runner.py

This issue should be closed.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Any JavaScript functional test for this repo?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28270)

🤔 stratospher reviewed a pull request: "crypto: more `Span<std::byte>` modernization & follow-ups"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28100#pullrequestreview-1570882712)
ACK baf93fb. neat c++!

💬 stratospher commented on pull request "crypto: more `Span<std::byte>` modernization & follow-ups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28100#discussion_r1293430357)
bc0a714:
```suggestion
void Crypt(Span<const std::byte> in_bytes, Span<std::byte> out_bytes) noexcept;
```

💬 stratospher commented on pull request "crypto: more `Span<std::byte>` modernization & follow-ups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28100#discussion_r1294172858)
bc0a714: did https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26153#discussion_r1129318294 mean clearing `m_buffer` too when `m_bufleft` is 0?

💬 stratospher commented on pull request "crypto: more `Span<std::byte>` modernization & follow-ups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28100#discussion_r1293541985)
bc0a714: maybe include ChaCha20 in the headers?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "lint: fix custom mypy cache dir setting":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28184#issuecomment-1678489503)
Are you still working on this? If not, could close, so that someone else can pick it up?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "Descriptor unit tests and simplifications":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24361#issuecomment-1678490489)
@sipa ^

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci: Run "macOS 11.0 [gui, no tests] [jammy]" job on GitHub Actions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28265#discussion_r1294251278)
> On the other hand, it's possible to delete images, so it wouldn't be too crazy to "abuse" GHCR for passing CI images and still avoid without eating storage without a limit.

Ah, looks like this is something that should probably be done either way, because untagged images are also kept around. So even if only images for the master branch are used, it would be good to delete "stale tags" (that is, untagged images).

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "test: rpc: add last block announcement time to getpeerinfo result":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27052#issuecomment-1678501363)
Force pushed from becf38061b2625bcc629293fec0dce7c27292e14 to
- efc2e70f1763c6bf3f6b246202adb9d5f1f798ee [diff](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/becf38061b2625bcc629293fec0dce7c27292e14..efc2e70f1763c6bf3f6b246202adb9d5f1f798ee) -- needed rebase
- 16d2903b8a9e6e980e24e04ab2d86c7e778f5764 [diff](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/efc2e70f1763c6bf3f6b246202adb9d5f1f798ee..16d2903b8a9e6e980e24e04ab2d86c7e778f5764) -- make the suggested review changes
- 2e80e3bdcd9cac7878c0d1495
...

👋 LarryRuane's pull request is ready for review: "test: rpc: add last block announcement time to getpeerinfo result"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27052)