💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: Remove python3.5 workaround":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27378#issuecomment-1492183698)
> however is still open and also affects Python 3.6.

Our minimum required Python is 3.7.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "refactor: remove unused param from legacy pubkey interface"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27274)

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "Fix logging RPC and -debugexclude with 0/none values, add test coverage, improve docs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27231#issuecomment-1492195680)
Rebased.

> could take advantage of that, to remove some of the complexity here; do we definitely need multiple different ways of achieving the same logging toggling?

Exploring this, it doesn't look like there would be much code simplification gained by dropping `none` for `0` only, which would no longer be in symmetry with `all/1` that have been operational for a long time. A couple lines could be saved by removing the `-debugexclude` config option, but that option is practical to have, a
...

👋 jonatack's pull request is ready for review: "Fix logging RPC and -debugexclude with 0/none values, add test coverage, improve docs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27231)

💬 jnewbery commented on pull request "net processing: #26140 follow-ups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27379#issuecomment-1492199212)
utACK 3fa4c54ac54b2d738e0c43b57b5c232ee02fe3b3

💬 Sjors commented on issue "Selecting two coins will abort with "The amount exceeds your balance."":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/688#issuecomment-1492207012)
Just to clarify: IIUC this was "caused" by https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25685 which is only in master. We assuming we fix this before v25.0 there's nothing to backport.

👍 stickies-v approved a pull request: "miniscript: explicit cast instead of comparing integers of different signs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27382)
ACK 9a54d88c8cb0c5d529f388c2ce53008e1ff126dd

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "wallet, gui: bugfix, getAvailableBalance skips selected coins":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26699#issuecomment-1492224218)
Tested that this fixes the coin selection + use available balance GUI issue for me. Haven't reviewed the code yet.

🤔 vostrnad requested changes to a pull request: "script: add description for the functionality of each opcode"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27109)

💬 vostrnad commented on pull request "script: add description for the functionality of each opcode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27109#discussion_r1131953241)
typo in multi

💬 vostrnad commented on pull request "script: add description for the functionality of each opcode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27109#discussion_r1131953155)
misspelled occurring (more instances further below)

💬 vostrnad commented on pull request "script: add description for the functionality of each opcode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27109#discussion_r1154694800)
Additionally, at least according to Bitcoin Optech, "multisignature" should not be confused with "multisig": https://bitcoinops.org/en/topics/multisignature/

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "script: add description for the functionality of each opcode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27109#discussion_r1154696924)
I guess we can say "for multiple signatures" (but nobody reading this deep inside the codebase will be confused)

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: Remove python3.5 workaround":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27378#issuecomment-1492272522)
This patch here disables the server timeout, so there shouldn't be any reason for the socket to be closed while `send`ing on macos. However, if that workaround is still needed, it should be guarded by a macos check. So my suggestion would be to assume the workaround is no longer needed, unless someone can prove otherwise?

💬 furszy commented on issue "Selecting two coins will abort with "The amount exceeds your balance."":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/688#issuecomment-1492388878)
> Just to clarify: IIUC this was "caused" by https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25685 which is only in master. We assuming we fix this before v25.0 there's nothing to backport.

Yes, that is the goal. #26699 is on the v25.0 milestone.
As it's a bug fix PR, it can get merged post feature freeze. Still, would be nice to start reviewing it asap.

💬 ProofOfKeags commented on issue "Manual-pruning cursor rewind":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19807#issuecomment-1492411342)
> I still don't see why anyone would want this feature except for re-scanning an old wallet on a pruned node

We ran into this issue as a result of having different dependent services that wanted access to different amounts of block history. If you prune to height N, and you install a different service that wants height N-M, the only solution is to do a full resync and download all the way back to N-N (aka 0). When M is small, this is needlessly expensive.

It is probably a rare use case, th
...

💬 Xekyo commented on pull request "Bump unconfirmed ancestor transactions to target feerate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26152#issuecomment-1492411947)
Rebased on latest version of #27021, then rebased on master to resolve merge conflicts.

Needed to reintroduce access to the Chain interface in `ChooseSelectionResult()`.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "net processing: #26140 follow-ups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27379#issuecomment-1492418189)
Concept ACK.

👍 jarolrod approved a pull request: "Update translation source file for v25.0 string freeze"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/724)
ACK e414edd8fc88b55a91f446dcc4d55cc4cd6d32e7

Went through the translation process again, confirming that plurals requires manual intervention in the translation source file.

I have a zero-diff with this branch after following the process steps.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "net processing: #26140 follow-ups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27379#discussion_r1154779794)
Nice!