💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#issuecomment-1925475526)
After re-evaluating everything, I ACK this pull request. It makes bitcoin core policies or mempool useless.

Apart from Libre Relay client, it is possible to do similar thing with a python script. Need to improve, because conf saved is used after relaunch.

https://gitlab.com/-/snippets/3645894

This pull request should be merged so that some people can do political drama on twitter but bare multisig tx will be included in blocks.

💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#issuecomment-1925475711)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217/commits/8672721deb06e66854a085c9994e99c99160b8a1

⚠️ A420mfer opened an issue: "Bitcoin node."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29379)
I'm not sure if I'm connected to my bitcoin node.. http://192.168.0.12:9000 is my url for JavaScript can this be looked into?

👍 hernanmarino approved a pull request: "debugwindow: update session ID tooltip"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/788#pullrequestreview-1861239224)
Concept ACK

🤔 1440000bytes reviewed a pull request: "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#pullrequestreview-1861264882)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217

No will fuck you and see how things works

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Bitcoin node."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29379)

💬 vasild commented on pull request "util: check for errors after close and read in AutoFile":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29307#issuecomment-1925699470)
> I don't think any care close-check needs to be done when reading from a file.

That is my understanding too.

> So what about removing the `write` method from `AutoFile`, and introduce a new derived class to add it back. This class could `Assume` that the file was flushed/closed before the destructor is called?

`Assume` is more for code correctness, not for external errors (like IO error). If it does not fail during testing and on CI, that does not mean IO errors are absent and will no
...

👍 vasild approved a pull request: "CKey: add Serialize and Unserialize"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29295#pullrequestreview-1861422503)
ACK af25cfcbabe96283625f3a32f493940658a5d1e5

I think the newly added generic ser/unser methods to `CKey` are harmless. "...especially when you can accomplish exactly what you want with the existing methods on `CKey`" that is doing the same thing, conceptually, but shifting the complexity to the caller in a way that is less efficient (more copying) and more prone to errors (the caller forgets to cleanse the intermediate buffer).

👍 vasild approved a pull request: "p2p: make block download logic aware of limited peers threshold"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28120#pullrequestreview-1861424801)
ACK c5b5843d8f10d96f76ee6b95f2b1b1b4ce755f75

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Fuzz: extend CConnman tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28584#issuecomment-1925753221)
`cd5bbb12e0...5e3c80da14`: address suggestions

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Fuzz: extend CConnman tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28584#discussion_r1477314621)
Right, done!

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Fuzz: extend CConnman tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28584#discussion_r1477314644)
Done, thanks!

📝 fanquake locked a pull request: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29376)
I hope this suggestion helps.

<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test impr
...

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29379)

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29368)

💬 delta1 commented on pull request "test: Add makefile target for running unit tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29377#issuecomment-1925863321)
utACK 5ca9b24da18e842e7a093dc44f6b222af73e92cf

💬 delta1 commented on pull request "wallet: remove unused 'accept_no_keys' arg from decryption process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29375#issuecomment-1925863898)
ACK 2bb25ce5023c4d56c8b11e9c75f9f8bd69894452

Nice cleanup.

💬 delta1 commented on pull request "test: fix intermittent failure in `rpc_setban.py --v2transport`, run it in CI":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29372#issuecomment-1925867216)
tested ACK cc87ee4c3934028e78a59de509951ff7226ec80d

💬 sipa commented on issue "BIP324 tracking issue":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27634#issuecomment-1925871180)
There are a few minor follow-ups to consider still, but I believe this issue can be closed. Thanks everyone for getting us this far!

✅ sipa closed an issue: "BIP324 tracking issue"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27634)