Pick up “transaction fees in getblock” pull request #18771

1. 
   MarcoFalke commented at 1:43 am on April 26, 2020: member

   #16083 has been abandoned, so it would be a good first issue to take the branch (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16083#issuecomment-570842798) and submit it as a new pull request.

   Useful skills:

   Understanding of undo data, the RPC interface and the functional tests.

   Want to work on this issue?

   The purpose of the good first issue label is to highlight which issues are suitable for a new contributor without a deep understanding of the codebase.

   You do not need to request permission to start working on this. You are encouraged to comment on the issue if you are planning to work on it. This will help other contributors monitor which issues are actively being addressed and is also an effective way to request assistance if and when you need it.

   For guidance on contributing, please read CONTRIBUTING.md before opening your pull request.

2. MarcoFalke added the label good first issue on Apr 26, 2020
3. 
   RishabhBajaj97 commented at 7:13 pm on April 27, 2020: none

   Hey! I would like to contribute here but since I am a first timer to open source projects i would need some guidance
4. 
   azsxcv11060 commented at 10:31 pm on May 19, 2020: none

   #18771 (comment)
5. fanquake deleted a comment on May 24, 2020
6. 
   monokh commented at 7:35 am on May 27, 2020: none

   It would seem natural for getrawtransaction with verbosity=true to also return fees?

   Is this something to be addressed in #18772 or a separate issue/PR? Just noticed that #13108 was merged into this issue but subsequently no reference to that aspect (getrawtransaction)

7. 
   ycshao commented at 10:40 pm on June 9, 2020: contributor

   @RishabhBajaj97 are you still working on this? If not, I can pick it up.
8. 
   ycshao commented at 1:32 am on June 23, 2020: contributor

   Looks like @robot-visions is already working on this in #18772 .
9. MarcoFalke referenced this in commit f656165e9c on Dec 24, 2020
10. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 9:51 am on January 5, 2021: member

    verbosity=2 is still up for grabs here
11. 
    fyquah commented at 12:40 pm on February 19, 2021: contributor

    I’d look to look at this. @MarcoFalke , though, did you mean verbosity=3 ?
12. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 12:49 pm on February 19, 2021: member

    I mean the next verbosity level, whatever that may be
13. 
    fyquah commented at 12:52 pm on February 19, 2021: contributor

    Is there an issue referencing specifically what should be added to this verbosity level?

    Edit: Alright, I found it: #13108 IIUC, we want to add “prevout” to the RPC response. WIll starting hacking.

14. laanwj referenced this in commit 986003aff9 on Oct 19, 2021
15. 
    niVelion commented at 6:02 pm on January 14, 2022: none

    Was this closed by #22918?
16. MarcoFalke closed this on Jan 15, 2022

    ---

17. fanquake deleted a comment on Jan 15, 2022
18. DrahtBot locked this on Jan 15, 2023

Contributors
MarcoFalke RishabhBajaj97 azsxcv11060 monokh ycshao fyquah niVelion

Labels
good first issue