💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "init: Take lock on blocks directory in BlockManager ctor":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31860#discussion_r1956541082)
And have `BlockManager::m_lock` be a `std::unique_ptr<BlockDirLock>` instead?

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "fuzz: split `coinselection` harness"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31870)
This PR splits the `coinselection` fuzz harness into 4 targets (`coinselection_bnb`, `coinselection_knapsack`, `coinselection_srd`, `coinselection`). The goal is to be able to fuzz each algorithm separately (and avoid bad performance) and also all of them together.

👋 brunoerg's pull request is ready for review: "fuzz: split `coinselection` harness"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31870)

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "guix: Notarize MacOS app bundle and codesign all MacOS and Windows binaries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31407#issuecomment-2659997041)
> I'm not sure about the guix-build-096525e92cc2/output/dist-archive/bitcoin-096525e92cc2-codesignatures-e252afe1296a.tar.gz artifact in the output.

I think that has always been there?

Can confirm that the app bundle runs fine, and I am reproducing the hashes. Are extra steps such as manual codesigning expected when running the binaries archived in `output/x86_64-apple-darwin-codesigned/bitcoin-096525e92cc2-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.gz`?

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "guix: Notarize MacOS app bundle and codesign all MacOS and Windows binaries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31407#issuecomment-2660002068)
> Are extra steps such as manual codesigning expected when running the binaries archived in `output/x86_64-apple-darwin-codesigned/bitcoin-096525e92cc2-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.gz`?

No, these should all be codesigned now.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds and increase -maxorphantxs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r1956579091)
Ok, I've made it 101 * 30 + 101 = 3131 total. I think the `wait_until` for the 1p1c orphan to be in orphanage kind of achieves what we want (i.e. evictions for each of the previous orphans have already been calculated) even though we don't explicitly wait for each peer.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "net: reduce CAddress usage to CService or CNetAddr":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31854#issuecomment-2660041953)
ACK cd4bfaee103591f212b88afd17969c16c1056eb6

📝 Syed-AbdurRahaman2006 opened a pull request: "Update README.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31871)
i changed line number 16 from further to for more because of increasing the readability.

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

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin C
...

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "Update README.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31871)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "doc: Improve dependencies documentation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31634#issuecomment-2660049612)
ACK a759ea3e920dcba52798755ba9f3891f914afbb0

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "net: reduce CAddress usage to CService or CNetAddr"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31854)

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "net: reduce CAddress usage to CService or CNetAddr":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31854#issuecomment-2660058465)
Post-merge approach ACK. Good idea.

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "doc: Improve dependencies documentation"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31634)

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds and increase -maxorphantxs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r1956602557)
Let's set the upper range to DEFAULT_MAX_ORPHAN_ANNOUNCEMENTS?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds and increase -maxorphantxs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r1956603725)
set the upper range to DEFAULT_ANCESTOR_SIZE_LIMIT_KVB * 4000? See no reason to not cover the full range (we could also increase the num_outs range to make larger ranges hit based on a bool?

📝 Syed-AbdurRahaman2006 opened a pull request: "Update CONTRIBUTING.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31872)
in line number 11 i changed the sentence because it is overstructured sentence in normal content from this line to "Open source often naturally revolves around a meritocracy where contributors earn trust from the developer community over time." to this "In open source projects, contributors gradually earn trust from the developer community, forming a natural meritocracy."

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

Pull requests without a rationale and clear imp
...

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "Update CONTRIBUTING.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31872)

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "Update CONTRIBUTING.md":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31872#discussion_r1956610196)
NACK. Not worth the change, and the patch is missing a space here.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "test: Add test for rpcwhitelistdefault":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29858#issuecomment-2660095729)
ACK f0e5e4cdbec4df190c952d5a61d7a882a7e3b59e

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds and increase -maxorphantxs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r1956621497)
done