cc @luke-jr @achow101

Can we get a test for this behavior?

The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

• #22693 (RPC/Wallet: Add "use_txids" to output of getaddressinfo by luke-jr)

If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

Can we get a test for this behavior?

Added a test, that fails before the revert and passes after. Not sure if there are other things to test.

But on the second thought, I should've just added some new assertions in an existing test rather than a create a new test file. I'll find a new home for it, maybe in wallet_abandonconflict.py. Wdyt?

Moved tests to the existing file. This is ready for review

The rename in the test seems unnecessary. It adds a lot of noise to the commit.

The rename in the test seems unnecessary. It adds a lot of noise to the commit.

We need two wallets on the same node to verify the intended behavior. That means we need to specify wallet each time we call an RPC.

One way we can workaround that is to unload the second wallet. But I'm not convinced this is better as it makes the test more fragile. Do you have other ideas how to avoid renames?

We need two wallets on the same node to verify the intended behavior. That means we need to specify wallet each time we call an RPC.

Ah, it looked like you were just replacing self.nodes[0] and self.nodes[1] with alice, and bob, but looking more closely, it is actually different.

ACK 3ee6d07

Do we want to have it in 23.0 milestone?