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

Code Coverage & Benchmarks

For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/32501.

Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process.

If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

• #32514 (scripted-diff: Remove unused leading newline in RPC docs by maflcko)
• #32238 (qt, wallet: Convert uint256 to Txid by marcofleon)

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.

This seems very similar to the approach taken in #29468. There were a couple of unaddressed review comments that seem to apply here too, so I think it would be good to list and address them. Furthermore, it might be appropriate to credit the original author?

@BrandonOdiwuor
I don't think it's productive to open a draft PR without first addressing the comments.
If you'd like to continue working on this but are facing blockers, it would be better to communicate your approach and explain where you're stuck in the tracking issue.

I suggest closing this for now and reopening it once the concerns raised about the previous approach have been addressed.

🐙 This pull request conflicts with the target branch and needs rebase.

Closing for now. I don't think there is any need in opening a pull request that is just a previously closed pull request with:

• the original author stripped,
• no reference to the previously closed pull,
• failing tests,
• no feedback addressed.

Contributions are welcome. Just make sure to run the tests before opening a pull request. Also, pre-existing review feedback would be good to address before opening a pull request.