💬 achow101 commented on pull request "qt: 28.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30715#issuecomment-2310874299)
ACK a0cdf43c4dde4f8d1983311fee2393fcde9123fe

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "qt: 28.0 translations update"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30715)

🤔 ryanofsky reviewed a pull request: "Fix -norpcwhitelist, -norpcallowip, and similar corner case behavior"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30529#pullrequestreview-2261368799)
Updated 10770c164485324af8acdd3b932b51d32862c41f -> a1c9d23ff587b84d37175b2993ea6760f9762177 ([`pr/listset.3`](https://github.com/ryanofsky/bitcoin/commits/pr/listset.3) -> [`pr/listset.4`](https://github.com/ryanofsky/bitcoin/commits/pr/listset.4), [compare](https://github.com/ryanofsky/bitcoin/compare/pr/listset.3..pr/listset.4)) with suggested changes

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "Fix -norpcwhitelist, -norpcallowip, and similar corner case behavior":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30529#discussion_r1731662812)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30529#discussion_r1710072169

> maybe use the term outbound connections instead of addrman connections?

Thanks, used and updated this comment

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "Fix -norpcwhitelist, -norpcallowip, and similar corner case behavior":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30529#discussion_r1731662703)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30529#discussion_r1730774338

> would `IsArgSet` be simpler compared to `GetArgs()/IsArgNegated()` here?

It's true double negation behavior, treating `-noconnect=0` like `-connect=1`, is confusing and not obvious. But ArgsManager code goes out of its way to treat double negated settings the same as setting 1, so you generally do not need to think about this case when you are looking at code calling ArgsManager methods. If the code is doing the ri
...

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "Fix -norpcwhitelist, -norpcallowip, and similar corner case behavior":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30529#discussion_r1731683649)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30529#discussion_r1719789856

> [ea7dbfb](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ea7dbfba8a62f3ba32b4386392721679d802e8ed):

Thanks! That might have caused problems if more tests were added after this

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "Introduce waitTipChanged() mining interface, replace RPCNotifyBlockChange, drop CRPCSignals & g_best_block":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30409#discussion_r1731725112)
Thanks ryanofsky, that is exactly what I had in mind for a potential followup - happy to have this in one go. I still need to think through the trade-offs for the block template rpc, but I think this might actually be better.

📝 achow101 opened a pull request: "Pre-28.x branch off version bump and doc updates"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30719)
* Bump to 28.99 in preparation for the 28.x branching
* Remove current release note fragments. They've been moved to [draft release notes]((https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/28.0-Release-Notes-Draft).) in the wiki.
* Updated bips.md with missing BIPs that were implemented a while ago.

📝 achow101 opened a pull request: "chainparams: Remove seed.bitcoinstats.com"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30720)
This seeder no longer appears to be serving sufficient addresses.

Fixes #29911

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "seeds: Pull additional nodes from my seeder and update fixed seeds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30008)

💬 Rob1Ham commented on issue "An "output descriptor" should not have many different checksums":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30632#issuecomment-2310966130)
I'm seeing an issue related to this.

When I get checksums of two descriptors (an internal and external one) individually, I get these checksum values:

```
getdescriptorinfo "wsh(andor(multi(2,[a0d3c79c/48'/1'/83'/2']tpubDFGoZLGBUQDBPzYHppiNcmX8hg2BkJvaanhUUyQHQCvkbjmqvb5akMW5AQKdYxSHbkaYPZR4JMMSMF7qSW3iERxPoVKSjdttnmEvwhpDAC7/0/*,[ea2484f9/48'/1'/83'/2']tpubDEzGdYvznBEvmWDgo8aJznu74ZRcQct2d2k6VEVtcgKJvCjCVitPVTtxgAfM2Hd5QVscv2jN8AjN6Ch69NhXYiceZ7eR8Sth2Sq6UND18So/0/*,[93f245d7/48'/1'/83'/
...

💬 furszy commented on pull request "Bugfix: Ensure Atomicity in Wallet Settings Updates from Chain Interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30697#discussion_r1731749995)
I don't think this alias is needed. It isn't really a complex function and forces devs to scroll / search it. It can just be in another line in the function declaration.

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "Bugfix: Ensure Atomicity in Wallet Settings Updates from Chain Interface"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30697#pullrequestreview-2261512268)
self-code-ACK

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "build: Introduce CMake-based build system":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30454#discussion_r1731757103)
In a2317e27b7fb86df4e32cd1674c06e09cb808248 "cmake: Add root `CMakeLists.txt` file"

The plan is to have this merged post 28.x branch off, so I think this should be set to 28.

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "test: Shut down framework cleanly on RPC connection failure":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30660#issuecomment-2311026632)
Last week I was [hit by this again](https://github.com/hodlinator/bitcoin/actions/runs/10491632082/job/29061229925). Probably line ending differences on Windows makes any additional Python exception reporting extra annoying to read due to every second line being blank (separate issue, but slightly improved by this PR producing less output).

### Git-sleuthing to help motivate this PR
#### Was this ever working?
Unfortunately for my case, it seems the answer is no:
7897338918dac072e788b8ab29
...

💬 theuni commented on pull request "build: Introduce CMake-based build system":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30454#issuecomment-2311036181)
x86-64 Guix build:
```
bfce0ebd120bd45576586691c46b47e66bb0031f7540772a924d4cb1c2602576 aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-41051290ab3b-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
615aae82e503fc07ee1053649b3a45ad2f0dd9c02d5a85394f8ba33b3bd5be88 aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-41051290ab3b-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
c4e0333106b259d1ab11066677fc32fba8dd380afc2f9c334d9eff2dccccba39 aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
152a84bd68011d9af6e30830f4da1a72ebee401160c1fefd46e9de0cae77c94a arm64-apple-darwin/bitcoin-41051290ab3b-
...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "build: Introduce CMake-based build system":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30454#issuecomment-2311072370)
doc/developer-notes.md needs to be updated too.

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "init: fix init fatal error on invalid negated option value":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30684#discussion_r1731810191)
In commit "init: fix fatal error on '-wallet' negated option value" (0df52e24363f729210887ca20a47824ba8073617)

I think this should be extended to test `-nowallet=0`. Maybe consider making this a loop to test both `-nowallet=0` `-nowallet=not_a_boolean`.

Reason: the simplest and most direct way to trigger the uncaught exception is to write `-nowallet=0`. The `-nowallet=not_a_boolean` case is a more complicated and indirect way to trigger it relies on `IntepretBool` interpreting the string `
...

👍 ryanofsky approved a pull request: "init: fix init fatal error on invalid negated option value"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30684#pullrequestreview-2261617194)
Code review ACK 0df52e24363f729210887ca20a47824ba8073617

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "[WIP] seeds: Add additional seed source and bump uptime requirements for Onion and I2P nodes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30695#issuecomment-2311114681)
> your cjdns node is no longer part of the cjdns node list because the node didn't have the NODE_NETWORK version bit set

Yes, I reluctantly had to begin pruning due to the increased rate of chain data growth. Is there now only one CJDNS node?