fanquake

Ok. Labelling this "Up for grabs" for now.

Moving this to `v0.20.0` as we shouldn't have to solve anything here for `v0.19.0`.

At this point this isn't going to happen for 23.0. Moving this to 24.0

Moving this to future. We can revisit depending on what happens during testing of release candidates for 24.x.

Looks like this is still the case as of Dockygen 1.9.4. Removing the Bug label because this isn't a bug in Core.

The issue is Doxygens parsing of `EXCLUSIVE_LOCKS_REQUIRED(::cs_main);` vs `EXCLUSIVE_LOCKS_REQUIRED(cs_main);`. We could add a temporary workaround to our config, to at least unbreak the generated documentation. Submitted an issue upstream: https://github.com/doxygen/doxygen/issues/9499.

@Rspigler can you confirm / comment on @mzumsande's comment?

> Bitcoin Core 23.0 @CWDT250 are you able to test the behaviour using a build of the master branch?

> Could such a modification of AX_BOOST_BASE make more burden to incorporate future changes from upstream? I doubt it. These macros change infrequently, and the fact that we don't need...

> The first commit 06ce8c0 differs In what way? Iirc I took the change from the autoconf archive on GitHub, and that may have diverged from that repository.