✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "updated"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451)

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "httpserver, rest: fix segmentation fault on evhttp_uri_get_query":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27253#issuecomment-1505248502)
> if the `HTTPRequest` object is created successfully (once `replySent` is removed and the test does `try/catch`). If the input is such that `HTTPRequest:HTTPRequest()` throws, then it does not have to test the above because it will never be executed in the real code.

I'm sorry, I said nonsense, ofc that code won't be executed because the `uri_parsed` will be null and so on, my concern is that we'll lose the test coverage by the current fuzz, even it's not a real case scenario, the test is pe
...

💬 glozow commented on pull request "mempool / miner: regularly flush <=0-fee entries and mine everything in the mempool":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27018#discussion_r1164171540)
> From the ephemeral anchors review club:

>> `<glozow> ok hm. i kinda need to get rid of blockmintxfee for pakcage relay tho`

> Can you elaborate on that?

My thinking there was that we needed to address this DoS issue in order to proceed with package relay, and this PR seemed like the most likely approach (hence the "kinda"). Now, maybe #26933 seems more likely?

> You can just drop the blockminfee commit from this PR, and it seems fine, no?
> The only result of setting -blockmin
...

💬 tarunraheja84 commented on pull request "updated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451#issuecomment-1505330949)
Hello, I am completely new to open source. This was my first PR.
Compiling Bitcoin Core into pc is the first step for a new developer to get started with which is not mentioned in Readme anywhere. I thought this very process should have been mentioned in Readme itself in a clean way instead of the link to doc folder.
Can you please highlight reasons of closing this PR understanding I am a beginner having great zeal to learn and contribute.

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "updated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451#issuecomment-1505331980)
@tarunraheja84 see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/build-windows.md

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "updated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451#issuecomment-1505333867)
Thanks for contributing and for your excitement -- you could have saved a little time by opening an issue first or asking on IRC or stackexchange for example where the windows build directions are, before putting in the work you did.

💬 tarunraheja84 commented on pull request "updated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451#issuecomment-1505338178)
@pinheadmz Can you please share links for Bitcoin Core IRC and StackExchange. I will be grateful.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "updated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451#issuecomment-1505339477)
> @pinheadmz Can you please share links for Bitcoin Core IRC and StackExchange. I will be grateful.

https://github.com/jonatack/bitcoin-development/blob/master/irc-channels.txt

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "updated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451#issuecomment-1505340415)
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions

💬 tarunraheja84 commented on pull request "updated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451#issuecomment-1505343858)
Thankyou very much

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "updated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27451#issuecomment-1505352444)
> Hello, I am completely new to open source. This was my first PR. Compiling Bitcoin Core into pc is the first step for a new developer to get started with which is not mentioned in Readme anywhere.

@tarunraheja84 Here are some resources you may find useful: https://jonatack.github.io/articles

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Allow configuring target block time for a signet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27446#issuecomment-1505365250)
> So in the end the parameter would need to be distributed the same way as `signetchallenge`

I had similar thoughts and think eventually we may want to introduce a more encompassing (and upgradeable) parameter such as `-signetconfig` in which all signet consensus parameters are encoded (currently just challenge and blocktime), but I think starting with the current modular approach is fine given that it's signet.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "mempool: disallow txns under min relay fee, even in packages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26933#issuecomment-1505372661)
concept ACK

I find both variants unsatisfactory for different reasons, but while we're working on something potentially better, I think this small change is the most reasonable, as it can be removed simply if improved upon. Meanwhile, we can continue moving forward with package relay/RBF/et al.

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "index: ThreadSanitizer: data race on vptr ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27355#issuecomment-1505373331)
Hmm, then my guess that it could be the timeout was probably wrong. Could you run the test in isolation with `-- -printtoconsole` and post the log?

💬 glozow commented on pull request "Remove BIP35 mempool p2p message":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27426#issuecomment-1505385773)
> > let's say we came up with a way [...] to try to sync the top of node mempools from time to time. Is there a reason that would be a bad idea
>
> I think that's a different way of describing "rebroadcast", which seems like a good idea: it improves miner revenue, improves tx propagation, improves block propagation, makes eclipse and pinning attacks harder... At least assuming it can be implemented without too many terrible tradeoffs.

+1. I don't think it implies BIP35 support is good, tho
...

📝 pinheadmz opened a pull request: "test: cover addrv2 anchors by adding TorV3 to CAddress in messages.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27452)
Adds test coverage for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20516 to ensure that https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20511 is completed and may be closed.

This PR adds a test case to `feature_anchors.py` where an onion v3 address is set as a blocks-only relay peer and then shutdown, ensuring that the address is saved to anchors.dat in addrv2 format. We then ensure that bitcoin attempts to reconnect to that anchor address on restart.

To compute the addrv2 serialization of the onion
...

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "anchors.dat doesn't support V2 addresses":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20511#issuecomment-1505405451)
> @pinheadmz I think so.

Confirmed with tests! See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27452

✅ pinheadmz closed an issue: "anchors.dat doesn't support V2 addresses"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20511)

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "test: cover addrv2 anchors by adding TorV3 to CAddress in messages.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27452#issuecomment-1505407282)
Did you take a look at #27295?

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "test: cover addrv2 anchors by adding TorV3 to CAddress in messages.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27452#issuecomment-1505412445)
> Did you take a look at #27295?

I will now!