Antoine Poinsot
Antoine Poinsot
Why? When would the function ever return false? On Tuesday, May 7th, 2024 at 11:25 AM, pythcoiner ***@***.***> wrote: > ***@***.***(https://github.com/darosior) should we then change the return type of genuine_check()...
If it's not genuine an error is returned already. On Tuesday, May 7th, 2024 at 12:52 PM, pythcoiner ***@***.***> wrote: > when the device is not genuine > > —...
Hi, my bad for coming back to you so late. This notification slipped through my email and i'm only re-discovering it now. Your help would be very welcome. No need...
I tested this PR by rebasing #29409 on top of it and running my (updated) `core_bdk_wallet` against it. I found that `bitcoin-node` will (still) segfault if i try to stop...
You could also use scids, it's a unique id way shorter than txids
Or just sort them and assign them an index.
CI failure looks unrelated. Could you `s/script/miniscript/` in the PR title to make it clear to reviewer this does not touch consensus critical stuff? > It's unfortunate that this PR...
From a quick skim, this looks fine to me. I wonder if @sipa has any objection to not using pointers here. Let me see if we can get the conflicts...
deposited / acknowledged / active is what we previously had. Cross-linking https://github.com/revault/revault-gui/issues/88 which is the only reference i could find to the decision of moving to not mention deposited coins....
We still account for the 'securing' funds in the total balance. 