💬 achow101 commented on pull request "validation: Replace MinBIP9WarningHeight with MinBIP9WarningStartTime":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27427#issuecomment-2414108679)
Closing this as it has not had any activity in a while. If you are interested in continuing work on this, please leave a comment so that it can be reopened.

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "rpc: Add test-only RPCs under `-test=<option>` flag"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30717)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "rpc: Add test-only RPCs under `-test=<option>` flag":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30717#issuecomment-2414111881)
This PR does not seem to have attracted much attention from reviewers. As such, it does not seem important enough right now to keep it sitting idle in the list of open PRs.

Closing due to lack of interest.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "doc: Fix gen-manpages to check build options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29457#issuecomment-2414116587)
Are you still working on this?

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "refactor: Remove redundant definitions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29492#issuecomment-2414119022)
Are you still working on this?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Remove redundant definitions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29492#discussion_r1801314662)
I wonder why clang-tidy can't pick this one up. Ref: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31051/files

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "rpc: method removeprunedfunds should take an array of txids":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29468#issuecomment-2414141562)
> Doing batches of RPC calls is definitely slower than if we handled this case internally.

Do you have any performance analysis to look into the difference between both approaches? That would be helpful to assess the merit of this PR.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "rpc: method removeprunedfunds should take an array of txids":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29468#issuecomment-2414141670)
Are you still working on this?

The comment about backwards compatibility was never addressed.

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "doc: Fix gen-manpages to check build options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29457#issuecomment-2414143198)
Thanks for working on this issue, however this needs update after the cmake change.. This is the new contents of `test/config.ini`:
```ini
[components]
# Which components are enabled. These are commented out by `configure` if they were disabled when running config.
ENABLE_WALLET=true
USE_SQLITE=true
#USE_BDB=true
ENABLE_CLI=true
ENABLE_BITCOIN_UTIL=true
ENABLE_WALLET_TOOL=true
ENABLE_BITCOIND=true
#ENABLE_FUZZ_BINARY=true
#ENABLE_ZMQ=true
ENABLE_EXTERNAL_SIGNER=true
#ENABLE_USDT_TR
...

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "RPC/Wallet: Add "use_txids" to output of getaddressinfo"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22693)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "RPC/Wallet: Add "use_txids" to output of getaddressinfo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22693#issuecomment-2414143984)
This PR does not seem to have attracted much attention from reviewers. As such, it does not seem important enough right now to keep it sitting idle in the list of open PRs.

Closing due to lack of interest.

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "test: Makes `wait_for_getdata` delete data on checks, plus allows to check the getdata message type"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29748)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "test: Makes `wait_for_getdata` delete data on checks, plus allows to check the getdata message type":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29748#issuecomment-2414146220)
This PR does not seem to have attracted much attention from reviewers. As such, it does not seem important enough right now to keep it sitting idle in the list of open PRs.

Closing due to lack of interest.

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "BufferedFile: fclose at destruction"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29614)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "BufferedFile: fclose at destruction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29614#issuecomment-2414154943)
This PR does not seem to have attracted much attention from reviewers. As such, it does not seem important enough right now to keep it sitting idle in the list of open PRs.

Closing due to lack of interest.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "RPC: Return `permitbaremultisig` and `maxdatacarriersize` in `getmempoolinfo`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29954#issuecomment-2414160275)
Please rebase for cmake if you are still interested in working on this.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "doc: note that you can assume C++20.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30136#issuecomment-2414164245)
Is this still relevant after cmake?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Safegcd-based modular inverses in MuHash3072":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21590#issuecomment-2414166896)
CI fails, presumably after https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29071

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "validation: Make ReplayBlocks interruptible":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30155#issuecomment-2414167167)
Concept ACK

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "CI: Add label to scripted-diffs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31089#issuecomment-2414178926)
> My suggestion was for @DrahtBot to add the label only once it had actually run the scripted-diff successfully.

If you think that's better than doing it in a separate job, I'll investigate.
@maflcko, would that work with you as well?