💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "test: Check datadir cleanup after assumeutxo was successful":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32033#issuecomment-2727626203)
utACK 52482cb24400f8c44ba9628aaaecb7c04b11beb2

The build failure seems unrelated

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "test: Check datadir cleanup after assumeutxo was successful":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32033#discussion_r1997696997)
nit: `node.datadir_path / node.chain / "chainstate_snapshot"` could be extracted to obviate that it's checked multiple times

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1997703505)
What did work was setting `-maxconnections=1` and then `-addnode=<local node>`. This did create a single blocks only peer along with the addnode peer, but it was able to use private broadcast. So, seems like there is a switch somewhere that disables this if `-maxconnections=0` exactly?

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "test: Check datadir cleanup after assumeutxo was successful":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32033#discussion_r1997707260)
Will do if I have to retouch

💬 mabu44 commented on pull request "test: Check datadir cleanup after assumeutxo was successful":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32033#issuecomment-2727714824)
Re-ACK 52482cb24400f8c44ba9628aaaecb7c04b11beb2

💬 fanquake commented on issue "doc: Mempool Policy documentation Outdated since TRUC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32067#issuecomment-2727829866)
cc @glozow

⚠️ fanquake pinned an issue: "29.0 RC Testing Guide Feedback"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32026)
This issue is to discuss the [29.0 Release Candidate Testing Guide](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/29.0-Release-Candidate-Testing-Guide). If you have any feedback on the document, please leave a comment here.

Note: This is for feedback on the document, not on Bitcoin Core or on the 29.0 changes.

Thank you for taking a look at the guide and leaving your feedback.

ps. The initial page was co-authored-by:
@arejula27
@musaHaruna
@Prabhat1308
As part of the 2025 [Chaincode l
...

💬 glozow commented on pull request "test: fix intermittent failure in p2p_orphan_handling.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32063#issuecomment-2727852730)
Rebased in #32062

💬 glozow commented on pull request "build: Remove manpages when making MacOS app":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32064#issuecomment-2727853200)
Rebased in #32062

💬 glozow commented on pull request "build: use make < 3.82 syntax for define directive":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32070#issuecomment-2727853502)
Rebased in #32062

💬 glozow commented on pull request "fuzz: provide more realistic values to the base58(check) decoders":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31917#issuecomment-2727855318)
Backported in #32062

👋 glozow's pull request is ready for review: "[29.x] backports and rc2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32062)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "qa: Fix TxIndex race conditions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32010)

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1997875119)
Hmm actually it stops opening new connections after all connection slots and the addnode are filled. It logs request to open 5, but then never manages to open one if I set maxconnections below 10. It only works if I call sendrawtransaction shortly after startup before all slots are filled.

💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "[EXPERIMENTAL] Schnorr batch verification for blocks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29491#discussion_r1997877541)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29491/commits/454103832351311d11e16505ed1925bd5f1c6875: IIUC All the threads still share this batch. That means we still have the same locking problem; threads will be stuck waiting for the batch to be free. In my very rough implementation https://github.com/bitcoin-dev-tools/benchcoin/pull/41/commits/173f07dc4493de3d3a9420f6a966606913277e9d#diff-0f68d4063c2fb11000f9048e46478e26c0ea2622f7866d00b574f429c3a4db61 I opted to give each batch a thread to resolv
...

👍 fanquake approved a pull request: "qt: doc: adapt outdated binary paths to CMake changes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/858#pullrequestreview-2689072572)
ACK 7ebc458a8cb994bc3c0c129da61353968d955bc2

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "refactor: modernize outdated trait patterns using helper aliases (C++14/C++17)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31904#issuecomment-2728161946)
> As this is compile-time logic, i don't think this should actually affect the compiled code?

Yea, comparing the two branches only differs in version info in the binary.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "refactor: modernize outdated trait patterns using helper aliases (C++14/C++17)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31904)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "[29.x] backports and rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32062#issuecomment-2728233450)
Can also pull in https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/858 (if not this rc than next).

📝 bigspider opened a pull request: "OP_CHECKCONTRACTVERIFY"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32080)
This is a first draft implementation of the `OP_CHECKCONTRACTVERIFY` (`CCV`) opcode.

`CCV` enables to build Script-based state machines that span across multiple transactions, by providing an ergonomic tool to commit to - and introspect - the Script and possibly some _data_ that is committed inside inputs or outputs.

Related to this PR:
- [Draft BIP specifications](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1793).
- [Post on delving bitcoin](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/op-checkcontractverify-
...