💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Remove IsMine from migration code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30328#discussion_r1802903174)
Updated the comment.

💬 brunoerg commented on issue "Support transaction broadcast in REST interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31017#issuecomment-2416516487)
> The "should work without having access to the RPC interface" is the part that I'd like to understand better. For example, the electrs docs specifically mention the bitcoind jsonrpc authentication: https://github.com/romanz/electrs/blob/master/doc/config.md#electrs-configuration

It's not clear to me as well. Maybe they need it to start using the REST interface?

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Remove IsMine from migration code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30328#discussion_r1802908802)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Remove IsMine from migration code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30328#discussion_r1802908907)
Done

🤔 stickies-v reviewed a pull request: "Package validation: accept packages of size 1"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31096#pullrequestreview-2372128688)
Approach ACK, code LGTM 72872c7073e99da0828e788b25520dcecf721c1b and change looks safe at first sight but want to take some more time to think about it as I'm not super familiar with this code.

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Package validation: accept packages of size 1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31096#discussion_r1802914437)
No need to special-case this:

<details>
<summary>git diff on 72872c7073</summary>

```diff
diff --git a/test/functional/rpc_packages.py b/test/functional/rpc_packages.py
index d4da0f9b06..ce42bf810e 100755
--- a/test/functional/rpc_packages.py
+++ b/test/functional/rpc_packages.py
@@ -370,7 +370,7 @@ class RPCPackagesTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
node = self.nodes[0]

self.log.info("Submitpackage valid packages with 1 child and some number of parents")
- fo
...

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Package validation: accept packages of size 1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31096#discussion_r1802941507)
Note: this also requires updating this documentation: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/538ccaed004ff89ec8b2b71d8711feed624ffccc/doc/policy/packages.md?plain=1#L78-L79

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Package validation: accept packages of size 1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31096#discussion_r1802916686)
nit: we require exactly one child, so I think using `tx_parent` is unnecessarily confusing
```suggestion
BOOST_CHECK(IsChildWithParents({tx_child}));
BOOST_CHECK(IsChildWithParentsTree({tx_child}));
```

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286#discussion_r1802989706)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286#discussion_r1802989927)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Bump python minimum supported version to 3.10":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30527#issuecomment-2416676868)
ACK fa1b139d17d04cb23bdfb1dd9c2abcdad4bdcd27

💬 darosior commented on pull request "validation: Improve input script check error reporting":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31097#issuecomment-2416686539)
Here is a functional test which creates a transaction using an `OP_CODESEPARATOR` in its `scriptSig` (non-standard) but also uses an `OP_RETURN` right after, which makes it invalid by consensus. It returns the invalid combination of error strings fixed in this PR ("mandatory-script-verify-flag-failed" because it's a consensus failure, but "Using OP_CODESEPARATOR in non-witness script" because it returns the error string for the first check).

You should be able to trivially adapt it to the fix
...

✅ Sjors closed a pull request: "CKey: add Serialize and Unserialize"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29295)

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "Bump python minimum supported version to 3.10"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30527)

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "validation: Improve input script check error reporting":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31097#issuecomment-2416720400)
@darosior added the test to this PR, thanks!

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "optimization: reserve memory allocation for transaction inputs/outputs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30093#issuecomment-2416725377)
ACK ec585f11c38bbe277a596dcea3c813e7c6626050

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Bump minimum supported macOS to 13.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31048#discussion_r1803029870)
Shouldn't this be removed? C.f. 22574046c90c0662f3aa9b1baea074aff54f92a9 ?

⚠️ Sjors opened an issue: "Stratum v2 via IPC Mining Interface tracking issue"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31098)
After much discussion in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432 it appears there's currently little support for directly supporting Stratum v2 in Bitcoin Core, with most contributors favouring the creation of a Mining IPC interface that external applications can use.

The only such application currently is the Template Provider implemented by me in https://github.com/Sjors/bitcoin/pull/48. This also serves to illustrate how the interface is used and that it's complete. The folks working
...

✅ Sjors closed a pull request: "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432)

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#issuecomment-2416743789)
I'm moving this pull request to https://github.com/Sjors/bitcoin/pull/68. The `sv2` branch will continue to work as before for the time being. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31098 the plan moving forward.