💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "mempool: keep CPFP'd transactions when loading from mempool.dat":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27476#issuecomment-1512510817)
Maybe move most of the text in the PR description into a comment? "Review this first" and "Alternatives considered" stuff is useful here, but doesn't seem useful for the merge commit message?

⚠️ adityachoubeyy opened an issue: "UD"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27481)
### Motivation

UNIDENTIFIED SIMULATION DISTINCTION

### Possible solution

N/A

### Useful Skills

Unique Unidentified Distinction

### Guidance for new contributors

Want to work on this issue?

For guidance on contributing, please read [CONTRIBUTING.md](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) before opening your pull request.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "UD"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27481)

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "UD"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27481)

👍 vasild approved a pull request: "test: add regression tests for #27468 (invalid URI segfaults)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27477#pullrequestreview-1389480071)
ACK 6a77d290da589bd5620585def5bfc019e242e189

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "addrman: Enable selecting addresses by network":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27214#issuecomment-1512672126)
This will be merged after branch-off. It would be good to either get the follow up opened in advance, so we can avoid any time between merging, and the potential for intermittent CI failures, or, if that change is straight-forward enough, you could push an additional commit here, leaving the rest of the branch as-is.

💬 vasild commented on issue "Add per message stats to getnettotals rpc":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26337#issuecomment-1512696265)
@satsie, thanks, all looks good except the semantic of the argument (I have not looked at the code yet).

To me "aggregate by" means to "sum by" those fields, similarly to the `GROUP BY` clause in SQL. So, if I aggregate by `connection_type` and `message_type` I would expect to see only `network` and `direction` in the output. I do not have a strong opinion whether the argument should act that way or in the inverse way, but the name of the argument should be chosen in such a way as to avoid co
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "BIP324: Handshake prerequisites":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/23561#issuecomment-1512705307)
Closing this for now, as it's partly included in #27479.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "BIP324: Handshake prerequisites"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/23561)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: add regression tests for #27468 (invalid URI segfaults)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27477#issuecomment-1512724993)
This has been merged.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "test: add regression tests for #27468 (invalid URI segfaults)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27477)

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "blockstorage: Adjust fastprune limit if block exceeds blockfile size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27191#discussion_r1169737011)
I checked this carefully again and don't think anymore that the `+ 1` is necessary.

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "[24.x] Additional backports for 24.1"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27474#pullrequestreview-1389688800)
ACK 5c937ae7c323198c76f1743870c68f8576305a6e

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci: Use Cirrus CI dockerfile env":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27340#issuecomment-1512764647)
Going to merge this now, so that `25.x` and `master` will have the same CI infra.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "ci: Use Cirrus CI dockerfile env"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27340)

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "[24.x] Additional backports for 24.1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27474#issuecomment-1512851845)
Suggest adding https://github.com/stickies-v/bitcoin/commit/db6cf79694112a4679378fdd1f2bdf69cf6adbea which backports #27468, but without the changes to `rest_mempool` (query parameters in this endpoint were added only after v24 in #26207).

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "kernel: chainparams updates for 25.x"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27482)
Update chainparams pre `25.x` branch off.
Co-Author in the commits as a PR (#27223) had previously been opened too-early to do the same.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Update chainparams for 25.x":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27223#issuecomment-1512884770)
Done in #27482 (added you as co-author).

📝 MarcoFalke opened a pull request: " Bump python minimum version to 3.8 "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27483)
There is no pressing reason to drop support for 3.7, however there are several maintenance issues:

* There is no supported operating system that ships 3.7 by default. (debian:buster is EOL and unmaintained to the extent that it doesn't run in the CI environment. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27340#issuecomment-1484988445)
* Compiling python 3.7 from source is also unsupported on at least macos, according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24017#issuecomment-1107820790

...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "[24.x] Additional backports for 24.1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27474#issuecomment-1512916261)
> Suggest adding https://github.com/stickies-v/bitcoin/commit/db6cf79694112a4679378fdd1f2bdf69cf6adbea which backports https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27468,

Pulled & added metadata.

> Suggest adding https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/f73782a9032a462a71569e9424db9bf9eeababf3.

Ok.