👍 MarcoFalke approved a pull request: "refactor: RPC: pass named argument value as string_view"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26612)
nice

review ACK 545ff924ab6303ffabd91fdfc4f0a4962daf133c 📻

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

Signature:

```
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

review ACK 545ff924ab6303ffabd91fdfc4f0a4962daf133c 📻
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQGzBAEBCgAdFiEE+rVPoUahrI9sLGYTzit1aX5ppUgFAlwqrYAACgkQzit1aX5p
pUhxDQwAnkUGV9vWw6I02mle/ZFfeIWLL4UhIJjNmcc0UH+0DwtK7IM9V74ST0QZ
8iv5AOTv43xJ9Ltye54nIbJnjIhW1WmZ/nhwTHDqJtQHP2GqF4ao2uQo2nGMEt/G
O3BixrcDyYHQDOR92bou9pzc7BOJpQ
...

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "[Bug] Bitcoin-core. MacOs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27193#issuecomment-1453321748)
If you use bitcoind and not the gui, you can learn more about the usage by passing `-?` to the program and reading the help for, let's say, `-datadir`.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "[Bug] Bitcoin-core. MacOs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27193#issuecomment-1453321977)
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.

💬 anmode commented on issue "[Bug] Bitcoin-core. MacOs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27193#issuecomment-1453343056)
Ohh okayy..got the point thanks @MarcoFalke
Closing this issue.

✅ anmode closed an issue: "[Bug] Bitcoin-core. MacOs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27193)

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "Coin Controll for Unconfirmed Outputs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27190)

💬 theStack commented on issue "make check errors on big endian OpenBSD 7.2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26492#issuecomment-1453408152)
@grubles: Yeah, totally agree that running the tests on SPARC64 is likely not very meaningful. It's just the closest I could get, hoping that the problem could be triggered in general on a 64-bit big endian architecture on OpenBSD.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "make check errors on big endian OpenBSD 7.2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26492#issuecomment-1453413473)
Added to the 25.x milestone. Let's get this sorted out by the release.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "blockstorage: add an assert to avoid running oom with `-fastprune`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27191#issuecomment-1453440605)
Not sure how I feel about this change. It is trivial to create blocks exceeding this limit on regtest. If this happens, it should at least log a message explaining why it failed. The size limit constants used by fastprune seem arbitrary to me. What is their rationale, just fewer resources allocated while testing? If so, why are the revision files not size restricted as well?

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Use move semantics instead of custom swap functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26749#discussion_r1124429747)
> > Should this use emplace_back instead of push_back?
>
> I didn't mention this because I assumed the two functions would do the same if they received a moved object that is already fully constructed?

Oh, I think you are right they are equivalent in this case. I still think it would be a little better to use emplace_back for readability though, because with emplace_back you can be sure object is being constructed directly, while with push_back you have to check the types to know if a temp
...

💬 dougEfresh commented on pull request "doc: Fixup remove 'omitted...' doc for rpc getrawtransaction when verbose is 2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26968#issuecomment-1453532752)
@stickies-v This better?

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "doc: Fixup remove 'omitted...' doc for rpc getrawtransaction when verbose is 2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26968#discussion_r1124508727)
@dougEfresh this seems unaddressed?

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "doc: Fixup remove 'omitted...' doc for rpc getrawtransaction when verbose is 2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26968#discussion_r1124508846)
@dougEfresh this seems unaddressed?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Feature request: alert PR author in case of CI failure":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27178#issuecomment-1453594425)
Some more notes:

* I think we don't want to send out notifications for each failed task, only one if any task failed.

So what about adding a new label (yes moar labels) "CI failed" (or so) with the same process as "Needs rebase"? This would notify ~everyone, not only the author, but I think this is what we want. Because notifying the author in case of a intermittent CI network error is entirely pointless if they can't re-run the task anyway. For example, I can't re-run tasks anymore, so se
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "-march=armv8-a+crc+crypto detected as "yes" on ppc64 clang":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26025#issuecomment-1453602966)
Going to close this for now, as there isn't really anything here for us to do. Upstream now has a change open to fix the problem: https://reviews.llvm.org/D145141, that should land in LLVM/Clang 17.x.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "-march=armv8-a+crc+crypto detected as "yes" on ppc64 clang"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26025)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Disallow duplicate leaves inside `tr()` descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27104#issuecomment-1453604654)
Also cc @instagibbs (don't see any reaction)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "refactor: RPC: pass named argument value as string_view"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26612)

👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "build: produce a .zip for macOS distribution"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27099)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: produce a .zip for macOS distribution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27099#issuecomment-1453621303)
A few Concept ACKs here, so have rebased and undrafted.