⚠️ thonypony opened an issue: "Proposal: Implement HD Address Generation Mechanism for Outgoing Transactions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31254)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.

HD addressing is just a system for generating new addresses from a single seed. Currently, it automatically generates new addresses only for incoming transactions.

Suggestion/Question: Why not implement the same simple system of generating new addresses from a single seed for outgoing transactions? This could enhance privacy by automatically using a new sending address for each outgoing transaction, similar to how new receiving addres
...

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "Proposal: Implement HD Address Generation Mechanism for Outgoing Transactions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31254)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Proposal: Implement HD Address Generation Mechanism for Outgoing Transactions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31254#issuecomment-2463936815)
It is not possible to change a given prevout's output script.

Usually the issue tracker is used to track technical issues related to the Bitcoin Core code base.

General bitcoin questions and/or support requests are best directed to the [Bitcoin StackExchange](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com) or the `#bitcoin` IRC channel on Libera Chat, or one of the Bitcoin subreddits, or any other place that you feel is well suited.

Network-wide consensus and/or P2P changes first need to be discusse
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "fix: recitfy typos":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31253#issuecomment-2463948524)
Please squash your commits according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#squashing-commits

💬 i-am-yuvi commented on pull request "net, init: derive default onion port if a user specified a -port":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31223#issuecomment-2463949135)
Concept ACK

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "refactor: mining interface 30955 followups"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31197#pullrequestreview-2423018734)
ACK 058862581085316927287817b2af01e8f4765a1d

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "refactor: mining interface 30955 followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31197#discussion_r1833905820)
Nit: Since this is a style fix in the first place already, could also put the bracket on a new line to make clang-format happy.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2464213134)
`ec7693a9aa...f5fc9451aa`: rebase and drop the commits that were already merged via https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29420

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Update manpage descriptions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29686#issuecomment-2464221449)
> I just realised it would be great to commit the newly generated man pages here? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/doc/man
>
> There are already outdated man pages in that directory, might as well update them now.

I don't understand. How are the placeholders outdated and how should they be updated?

👍 maflcko approved a pull request: "Update manpage descriptions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29686#pullrequestreview-2423171386)
ACK 47f50c7af5572520fd986b313a63a44a76d3c859 📠

<details><summary>Show signature</summary>

Signature:

```
untrusted comment: signature from minisign secret key on empty file; verify via: minisign -Vm "${path_to_any_empty_file}" -P RWTRmVTMeKV5noAMqVlsMugDDCyyTSbA3Re5AkUrhvLVln0tSaFWglOw -x "${path_to_this_whole_four_line_signature_blob}"
RUTRmVTMeKV5npGrKx1nqXCw5zeVHdtdYURB/KlyA/LMFgpNCs+SkW9a8N95d+U4AP1RJMi+krxU1A3Yux4bpwZNLvVBKy0wLgM=
trusted comment: ACK 47f50c7af5572520fd986b313a
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Update manpage descriptions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29686#discussion_r1833996135)
nit: Why remove testnet4? Makes sense to not duplicate everything here, but leaving the others seems inconsistent. I'd suggest to just say: "..., or the (test)chain selection arguments.\n"

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1834004515)
Marking this as resolved, feel free to comment if you have concerns with the "maximum lifetime" solution.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "rpc: Remove submitblock pre-checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31175#issuecomment-2464228255)
Updated b83d509d59dde352054cccf792d28bb87835e64f -> 309bd56d97f87f973f45897fc00b1bd2fc5cff1a ([submitblock_prechecks_1](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/tree/submitblock_prechecks_1) -> [submitblock_prechecks_2](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/tree/submitblock_prechecks_2), [compare](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/compare/submitblock_prechecks_1..submitblock_prechecks_2))


* Removed throw on missing coinbase in `submitblock`.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1834010212)
Marking this as resolved because I removed the requirement to set `-walletbroadcast=0` and extended the `-privatebroadcast` doc.

> My understanding was that anything done via the wallet would work as usual, but that transactions sent via sendrawtransaction would use the private broadcast mechanism if set

Yes, this is exactly how it works now.

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "Update manpage descriptions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29686#issuecomment-2464236232)
> > I just realised it would be great to commit the newly generated man pages here? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/doc/man
> > There are already outdated man pages in that directory, might as well update them now.
>
> I don't understand. How are the placeholders outdated and how should they be updated?

Oh my bad, I forgot they are placeholders.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "bench: add support for custom data directory":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31000#issuecomment-2464245393)
Yeah, don't worry about the ctest bug. It is unrelated and should be fixed somewhere else. I was mostly wondering why a force push that does not change behavior (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31000#issuecomment-2437357680) suddenly makes the CI trip. Why would CI pass before and not after, when `-testdatadir` isn't set. Maybe someone can run the two commits locally on Windows?

🤔 maflcko reviewed a pull request: "test: Rework wallet_migration.py to use previous releases"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31248#pullrequestreview-2423261020)
left a question/nit

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Rework wallet_migration.py to use previous releases":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31248#discussion_r1834052007)
I wonder if this diff can be removed by just using 28 as the previous release, with the `-deprecatedrpc=create_bdb` option enabled?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Add combinerawtransaction test to rpc_createmultisig":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31249#issuecomment-2464306592)
Forgot to move ab98e6fd039 as well? Otherwise

lgtm ACK af4d23178b420f46196fbace2176ce1fe94ed9cd

📝 rkrux opened a pull request: "contrib: correct default build path in man pages"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31255)
The `gen-manpages.py` script is unable to find
the executables because it tries to search in
`/bitcoin/src` when no custom `BUILDDIR` is set.
With the new build process in place, the default
build dir is now set to `/bitcoin/build`.

Prior to this change, the script stopped with a
`not found or not an executable` error. Now it
generates the man pages without needing to
explicitly set `BUILDDIR` variable.

<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull r
...