💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "net: replace manual reference counting of CNode with shared_ptr":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32015#discussion_r1990071370)
In thread https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32015#discussion_r1984875189:

Started proving out my suggestion and landed on something closer to master.
- Resurrect `m_nodes_disconnected` (now holding `shared_ptr`) along with clearly defined lifetimes.
- Resurrect `DeleteNode()`, but make it take an r-value `shared_ptr` and assert that `use_count() == 1`.
- Avoid adding `~CNode()` and `CNode::m_destruct_cb` along with sending it in everywhere in the constructor. This means we don't need
...

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "validation, fix: Use wtxid instead of txid in `CheckEphemeralSpends`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32025#pullrequestreview-2676077768)
ACK e637dc2c01c, hooray for type safety

📝 VolodymyrBg opened a pull request: "docs: fix grammatical typos in documentation files"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32036)
Fixed errors and inaccuracies in the project's textual materials.
Improved readability of texts and documentation.

💬 glozow commented on issue "cmake inconsistently overriding `-O3` (sometimes)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31491#issuecomment-2715691417)
I see a note in https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/29.0-Release-Notes-draft#build-system, so will remove this from the 29 milestone. Lmk if this seems wrong.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "docs: fix grammatical typos in documentation files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32036#issuecomment-2715701259)
Nack, misses context completely

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "Fee Estimation via Fee rate Forecasters":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30157#discussion_r1990152450)
This is confusing I think. It's titled `estimatefee` however a fee is usually a bitcoin amount. A feerate however is a bitcoin amount per size.

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "Fee Estimation via Fee rate Forecasters":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30157#discussion_r1990153325)
should this be "estimatefeerate"?

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "Fee Estimation via Fee rate Forecasters":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30157#discussion_r1990157249)
shouldn't the first positional argument be `conf_target` ?

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "Fee Estimation via Fee rate Forecasters":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30157#discussion_r1990158173)
```suggestion
// Add transactions with high_fee until mempool transactions weight is more than 25th percent of DEFAULT_BLOCK_MAX_WEIGHT
```

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "Fee Estimation via Fee rate Forecasters":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30157#discussion_r1990159751)
> than 25th percent of DEFAULT_BLOCK_MAX_WEIGHT

Maybe others understand this, but I'm not sure what 25th percent of ... means. Is that the same as 25% of ..?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Require sqlite when building the wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31961#issuecomment-2715787967)
> I could change depends here, but maybe it's easier to do that in the final PR that drops BDB itself?

Changes to depends shouldn't be big. Otherwise this statement from the PR description:
> ... it is no longer possible to not have sqlite available.

does not always hold (see a counter-example in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31961#issuecomment-2715187814).

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "qa: Enable feature_init.py on Windows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32021#discussion_r1990194152)
Can this approach be used for all platforms?

💬 fjahr commented on issue "Fully validated AssumeUTXO starts revalidating after restart":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32029#issuecomment-2715987586)
> 23 minutes on my M4 Max - likely ~40 minutes on commodity hardware

Huh, that sounds wrong, were you using a dev/debug build? Or is this probably cause by low resource allocation?

This is me on a vanilla M4 and `gettoutsetinfo` shouldn't do much different than verifying the hash:

```
$ time build/src/bitcoin-cli gettxoutsetinfo
{
"height": 887381,
"bestblock": "000000000000000000023ce7c194520dd6ef38a1d2633f8a726e3a7346549c09",
"txouts": 174298133,
"bogosize": 13621053583,
"hash_ser
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "cmake: Check for `makensis` and `zip` tools before using them for optional `deploy` targets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32019#discussion_r1990326043)
> find_program() command.

Details like this are completely unnecessary.

💬 aiswaryasankar commented on pull request "test: Check datadir cleanup after assumeutxo was successful":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32033#discussion_r1990348457)
Ensures proper cleanup of background chainstate after `assumeutxo` node restart to prevent disk space leaks

💬 aiswaryasankar commented on pull request "docs: fix grammatical typos in documentation files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32036#discussion_r1990364567)
No new bugs were introduced by the user's changes.

💬 aiswaryasankar commented on pull request "docs: fix grammatical typos in documentation files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32036#discussion_r1990364579)
The change from 'include directories' to 'included directories' is incorrect and introduces a grammatical error. The correct term is 'include directories'.

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "docs: fix grammatical typos in documentation files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32036#discussion_r1990381314)
This change looks valid

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "qt: 29.0 translations update"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32004)

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "docs: fix grammatical typos in documentation files"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32036)