💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467890537)
I've made it "We don't check whether the sibling is to-be-replaced (done in ApplyV3Rules) because that doesn't apply in a package."

💬 glozow commented on pull request "doc: update `BroadcastTransaction` comment":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29308#discussion_r1467894205)
You've deleted the comment entirely?

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467907205)
Cleaned up, thanks

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467908805)
Added "Should be called for package transactions to fail more quickly" to the doc (as in: not must call but should call).

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467909437)
Or I guess we could turn it off for `AcceptMultiple`?

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467909613)
Done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467909813)
Done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467909921)
Deleted

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467910021)
Added

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467910132)
Deleted

💬 vasild commented on pull request "CKey: add Serialize and Unserialize":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29295#discussion_r1467912714)
Do `CKey::Check()` on `keydata[0]`?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1467934024)
If we're focusing on small packages for now, can we just disable it, rename the function something "obviously" single txn related, and then in future updates we can reintroduce the check as an optimization if we like?

💬 josibake commented on pull request "CKey: add Serialize and Unserialize":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29295#issuecomment-1912459938)
> I need to read and write two private keys to/from disk

Not familiar with the stratumv2 spec, but this seems odd to me and also not a good fit for `CKey`. FWIW, there is `CPrivKey` for producing a serialized OpenSSL private key

💬 josibake commented on pull request "wallet: cache IsMine scriptPubKeys to improve performance of descriptor wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26008#issuecomment-1912466568)
Concept ACK

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "p2p: Allow whitelisting manual connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27114#issuecomment-1912524472)
Hmm, it's still weird, but I guess it's not terrible then.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#issuecomment-1912534383)
> Why was my last comment to Peter Todd's comment, DELETED? Where can I find the reasoning for such deletion?

Your comment was deleted because it was off topic, consisted of insults, and contributed nothing to the discussion. Continue to make such comments and you will be blocked from this repo.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "script/sign: avoid duplicated signature verification after signing (+introduce signing benchmarks)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28923#discussion_r1468041930)
> Have to admit that I'm lacking knowledge here about the concrete differences between FillableSigningProvider and FlatSigningProvider, especially about the possible benefits of the latter in this PR.

`FillableSigningProvider` is just the legacy class and contains legacy scripts limitations (thus #28307). It does not affect the current form of this PR but, because this benchmark uses segwit v0 and v1 outputs, it could cause issues in the future.

> Is there anything more that could be chang
...

💬 theuni commented on pull request "depends: patch libool out of libnatpmp/miniupnpc":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29298#discussion_r1468047664)
Yep, thanks for catching this. Updated and squashed.

💬 theuni commented on pull request "Avoid non-self-contained Windows header":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/789#issuecomment-1912605551)
ACK 8023640a71a10ec54a6a8e6b95a29d07f7be218d. It's not completely clear to me why this currently works, but I don't think it's worth wasting more time on. `windows.h` seems more correct regardless.

💬 theuni commented on pull request "depends: patch libool out of libnatpmp/miniupnpc":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29298#issuecomment-1912611289)
Removed one more missed instance of `LIBTOOL`.