anyone knows why ban on #bitcoin-core-dev at freenode?
MarcoFalke: just want to say thanks for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20560 ... i am merging (and build/test/fuzzing) all the 22.0 PRs from bitcoin into elements one-by-one, and the speedup building the fuzztests is *incredible*, i'm getting through PRs 25-30% faster
[gui] luke-jr opened pull request #368: Bugfix: GUI: When restoring table columns, still set their minimum column width and stretch on last section (master...bugfix_gui_restored_columns_stretch) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/368
[bitcoin] theStack opened pull request #22330: test: use MiniWallet for simple doublespend sub-test in feature_rbf.py (master...202106-test-feature_rbf_use_miniwallet_for_doublespend) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22330
* Added support for running Bitcoin Core as an [I2P (Invisible Internet Project)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I2P) service and connect to such services. See doc/i2p.md for details. (#20685)
Hello! :) I have been reading a lot about bitcoin recently and have been thoroughly moved! I want to start understanding and contributing to bitcoin-core. Can someone recommend good newbie contributor resources? Thanks
i think the idea of having a refactor where all references to bitcoin in filenames are replaced with core and all mentions of Bitcoin in the source lead back to a static variable is worth considering
similar to the PR that unified all uses of BTC across the codebase, now that with the word Bitcoin itself
would a PR that tries to unify all instances of the word "Bitcoin" be welcome?
i did some preliminary work on getting bitcoin core to build using cmake, like how monero does it
laanwj: "it's not possible to not bind a P2P port at all" -- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20234 is not supposed to change this behavior which is - no, you can't specify "don't bind at all" using -bind=... if -bind is not given then we bind on 0.0.0.0, if -bind=foo is given then we bind on foo
[bitcoin] glozow reopened pull request #22253: validation: distinguish between same tx and same-nonwitness-data tx in mempool (master...2021-06-same-txid-diff-wtxid) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22253
amiti: My two cents. I don't think you could have done any more to ensure everyone was aware of the PR and I can see why you're frustrated. A Bitcoin Core PR review club, bringing it up in P2P meeting(s), bringing it up in Core dev meeting, mailing list post etc