💬 alfonsoromanz commented on pull request "test: assumeutxo: add missing tests in wallet_assumeutxo.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30455#discussion_r1921646283)
This is a good point. Done

💬 alfonsoromanz commented on pull request "test: assumeutxo: add missing tests in wallet_assumeutxo.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30455#discussion_r1921646317)
Done

💬 alfonsoromanz commented on pull request "test: assumeutxo: add missing tests in wallet_assumeutxo.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30455#issuecomment-2601046939)
> Did another pass, mostly minor comments, otherwise looks pretty good. Will do a final pass when my comments have been addressed.

Thanks for the detailed feedback, @fjahr!. I pushed 2f19e42ddd85598438d0b8b49ef93c312c45c21b with your requested changes.

⚠️ SatoshiNakamoto2007 opened an issue: "Create project BankBitcoinBinance"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31686)
https://github.com/auth0-samples/auth0-react-samples/tree/master/Sample-01

✅ achow101 closed an issue: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31686)

:lock: achow101 locked an issue: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31686)

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "init: Lock blocksdir in addition to datadir"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31674#pullrequestreview-2561212482)
Code review and light test ACK 2656a5658c14b43c32959db7235e9db55a17d4c8

Nice update. Increasing safety for blocks dir before concurrency issues arise makes sense.

Sanity checked the migration from `.lock`less blocks dir on signet. New `.lock` was created without issue.

✅ araujo88 closed a pull request: "rpc: method removeprunedfunds should take an array of txids"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29468)

⚠️ mohammwdofficial opened an issue: "Gift me btc buy"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31687)
Exchanche blubank.complz

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "Gift me btc buy"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31687)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "`generateblock` RPC Not Collecting Transaction Fees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31684#issuecomment-2601620537)
> The block reward should include both the block subsidy and the transaction fees from all transactions included in the block.

Is there a use case for this? `generateblock` is a test-only RPC, so there is no need to write extra code to collect the fees. Note that the other `generate*` calls will collect the fees.

📝 Recepxx34 opened a pull request: "Update and rename README.md to GET /api/v1/lightning/channels?public_…"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31688)
```javascript
…key=:pubKey&status=:channelStatus

Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree
=====================================

https://bitcoincore.org

For an immediately usable, binary version of the Bitcoin Core software, see https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/.

What is Bitcoin Core?
---------------------

Bitcoin Core connects to the Bitcoin peer-to-peer network to download and fully validate blocks and transactions. It also includes a wallet and graphical user interface, which
...

✅ willcl-ark closed a pull request: "Update and rename README.md to GET /api/v1/lightning/channels?public_…"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31688)

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "Add NODE_TXRELAY_V2."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30837)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Add NODE_TXRELAY_V2.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30837#issuecomment-2601662492)
Closing for now, due to inactivity for a few months, and failing CI, since it was opened.

Please leave a comment, if you want this reopened. Alternatively, you can also open a new pull, since there hasn't been any discussion here anyway, except for discussions around the failing CI.

💬 naiyoma commented on pull request "test: Add test for rpcwhitelistdefault":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29858#discussion_r1921955676)
Update with all the changes -> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29858/commits/f0e5e4cdbec4df190c952d5a61d7a882a7e3b59e

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "guix: use GCC 13 to build releases":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29881#issuecomment-2601696269)
My Guix build:
```
riscv64
a22efc082966018f6ddd17d1a7092ffda56900895dd4694080244257e1c5c974 guix-build-6f0513613a98/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
ad65ac733f93931c5fcfa09afc2a1f8bed76cd5280be9b569ff9bdf15dec3abe guix-build-6f0513613a98/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-6f0513613a98-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
abc9037335e719927525c0474a7959db57a6f3f64d9522474ede4d88e721f73c guix-build-6f0513613a98/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-6f0513613a98-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
fdb01866
...

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "fuzz: Speed up *_package_eval fuzz targets a bit"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31457)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "fuzz: Speed up *_package_eval fuzz targets a bit":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31457#issuecomment-2601705016)
Closing for now, because changing the order of the elements in the set may invalidate the existing fuzz inputs, making this harder to review/test.

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "guix: use GCC 13 to build releases"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29881#pullrequestreview-2561635126)
re-ACK 6f0513613a987ef574897e43c41a6ada9022a9d7, only rebased since my recent [review](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29881#pullrequestreview-2500087136).