💬 achow101 commented on pull request "mempool: Add mempool tracepoints":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26531#discussion_r1139414366)
It would probably make sense to include the time for all of the tracepoints added in this PR?

💬 petertodd commented on pull request "Remove -mempoolfullrbf option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26525#issuecomment-1472835026)
https://petertodd.org/2022/bitcoin-core-nodes-running-fullrbf

17% of Bitcoin Core v24.x nodes were running full-rbf ***and successfully propagating*** when I measured it, and full-rbf transactions propagate well. Quite a few services are using this flag too, eg BTCPay now activates full-rbf by default: https://github.com/btcpayserver/btcpayserver-docker/pull/736 Both Umbrel and Start9 Labs, among others, have added support for this flag to their node offerings.

Also full-RBF replacements are g
...

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "p2p: cleanup `LookupIntern`, `Lookup` and `LookupHost`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26261#discussion_r1139429347)
Replaced it with `BOOST_REQUIRE()`

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "p2p: cleanup `LookupIntern`, `Lookup` and `LookupHost`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26261#issuecomment-1472866874)
Force-pushed addressing @vasild's review. Thanks @vasild for your in-depth review and considerations!

💬 mxaddict commented on pull request "doc: fix typo in interface_usdt_utxocache.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27268#issuecomment-1472883070)
Sure

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 05:08 Michael Ford ***@***.***> wrote:

> Can you update the commit message to the same as what I've changed the PR
> title too: doc: fix typo in interface_usdt_utxocache.py.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27268#issuecomment-1472741835>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIDAKKCHF2RJJJUMIZHSJDW4N6MJANCNFSM6AAAAAAV5JB5UM>
> .
> You are receiving this because you aut
...

💬 antuun commented on pull request "[24.x] Backports for 24.0.1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26616#issuecomment-1472998839)
Is me José can you help me about l can't spend nothing and no body support me l desinstales Wallet of Bitcoin.org because Have malaware so what can l do ?

💬 nostitos commented on pull request "Remove -mempoolfullrbf option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26525#issuecomment-1473050580)
> I'm certainly not inclined to spend $0.60 in fees for an on-chain transaction to pay a $15 phone top-up on Bitrefill.

Not sure where that's getting at but my typical "refill" is for 500$ cards.

💬 ariard commented on pull request "Remove -mempoolfullrbf option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26525#issuecomment-1473067644)
> Just reviving this. Four months have passed. What are the current stats on people flagging mempoolfullrbf=1?
>
> My guess is that literally only the hostile devs in this thread run it, and whichever miners they managed to persuade personally, and that there is no significant signal of support or usage of the feature in the wild, or am I wrong?
>
> It would be nice for the remaining thousands of users and merchants to not have to look over our shoulder and wonder if Core will sneak it on
...

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "Ignore datacarrier limits for dataless OP_RETURN outputs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27261#issuecomment-1473155403)
NACK. If someone wants to allow a bare OP_RETURN and nothing more they can set `-datacarriersize=1`. There's no reason to ignore someone setting `-nodatacarrier` to indicate they don't want OP_RETURN outputs in their mempool.

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "mempool: Add mempool tracepoints":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26531#discussion_r1139897157)
Not necessarily. Might be redundant. When a transaction is added and you pass the tracepoint arguments _directly_ to a tracing script (can't think of a reason why you would want to store it in a BPF map first for a while), then the time is very close to `now()`. Similar for rejected transactions and for the replacement transaction during RBF (the time when the replaced transaction entered is passed).

📝 Bushstar opened a pull request: "refactor: remove unused param from legacy pubkey interface"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27274)
Unused param present in legacy pubkey manager interface. This param will not be used and should be removed to prevent unintended usage.

📝 Bushstar opened a pull request: "build: ignore common editor files"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27275)
Add IntelliJ and Visual Studio Code editor files to .gitignore. Small QOL change :)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: ignore common editor files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27275#issuecomment-1473387105)
NACK. Feel free to add to your local (global) .gitignore.

💬 Bushstar commented on pull request "build: ignore common editor files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27275#issuecomment-1473392538)
If so should the Qt Creator entry be removed or leave it as this project uses Qt?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: Make the unlikely race in p2p_invalid_messages impossible":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27212#issuecomment-1473414979)
Thanks! Removed `?` and comment completely.

💬 AdarshRawat1 commented on issue "When opening or autoloading wallets there should be clear messages about rescanning in progress and wallets' names.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/259#issuecomment-1473479240)
can I work on this issue?

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "build: ignore common editor files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27275#issuecomment-1473485508)
@Bushstar I add project specific things to `.git/info/exclude` inside the project. But perhaps more helpful for you if you are using an IDE like that is if you add a global gitignore and reference it in your git config:

```
[core]
excludesfile = /path/to/your/gitignore_global
```

Then you'll never be bothered by it again yourself.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: ignore common editor files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27275#issuecomment-1473507800)
> If so should the Qt Creator entry be removed or leave it as this project uses Qt?

Can probably just leave things as-is. At some point we had instructions for using Qt Creator.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "build: ignore common editor files"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27275)

💬 Bushstar commented on pull request "build: ignore common editor files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27275#issuecomment-1473512419)
@willcl-ark top tips. I now have a global .gitignore file.