Release Schedule for 30.0

fanquake commented at 9:26 am on April 15, 2025: member

Here is a proposed release schedule for v30.0, the next major release of Bitcoin Core. The dates are set to target a release in early October.

2025-08-06 :heavy_check_mark:

Open Transifex translations for v30.0
Soft translation string freeze (no large or non-critical string changes until release)
Finalize and close translations for v28.0

2025-08-20 :heavy_check_mark:

Feature freeze (bug fixes only until release)
Translation string freeze (no more source language changes until release)

2025-09-09 :heavy_check_mark:

Anything needed before branch-off, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/release-process.md
Split off 30.x branch from master
Start RC cycle, tag and release v30.0rc1
Start merging for 31.x on master branch

2025-10-10 :construction:

Tag v30.0 (aim).

If any specific dates are a problem for you, please leave a comment.

fanquake added this to the milestone 30.0 on Apr 15, 2025

fanquake pinned this on Apr 15, 2025

bitcoin deleted a comment on Jun 6, 2025

bitcoin deleted a comment on Jun 17, 2025

Dorex45 commented at 10:06 pm on June 20, 2025: none

Cant wait for the release of 30.0

lamachina commented at 12:50 pm on July 16, 2025: none

blacknode.co is ready #️⃣🧡

bitcoin deleted a comment on Jul 24, 2025

maflcko commented at 8:17 am on August 7, 2025: member

2025-08-06 🚧

Looks like the translation update was missed?

hebasto referenced this in commit 63d604af05 on Aug 8, 2025

hebasto commented at 4:10 pm on August 8, 2025: member

2025-08-06 🚧

Open Transifex translations for v30.0

Soft translation string freeze (no large or non-critical string changes until release)

Finalize and close translations for v28.0

The first set of tasks has been completed.

See the translation opening announcement:

fanquake commented at 12:12 pm on August 21, 2025: member

Feature freeze (bug fixes only until release)

We are now in feature freeze.

fanquake referenced this in commit 84cf542039 on Sep 9, 2025

fanquake commented at 10:20 am on September 9, 2025: member

30.x has been branched off: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/30.x.

fanquake commented at 12:23 pm on September 9, 2025: member

v30.0rc1 has been tagged: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v30.0rc1.

Dorex45 commented at 7:47 pm on September 22, 2025: none

Cant wait for the release of V 30,Bitcoin sidechains are in for a massive ride,Bitcoin utilities are yet to be unlocked tremendously. V30 will champion the future of Bitcoin.

Dorex45 commented at 7:59 pm on September 22, 2025: none

Release schedule for v30.0 ACK.

VegArchie commented at 9:58 pm on October 1, 2025: none

Do to the overwhelming opposition to the OPRETURN changes in v30, and the unwarranted bending of the knee toward side chains, please remove any OPRETURN changes in v30 until a better, more acceptable solution for mempool accuracy or side chains can be developed.

Dorex45 commented at 10:10 pm on October 1, 2025: none

@VegArchie I disagree. The OP_RETURN changes in v30 are not about weakening Bitcoin but about strengthening its utility for scaling. By refining how OP_RETURN is handled, we improve data efficiency and open up better pathways for sidechains and layer-2 solutions to anchor securely on Bitcoin. Removing these changes would only slow down progress for scaling and innovation, which are essential if Bitcoin is to serve more users globally.

VegArchie commented at 11:09 pm on October 1, 2025: none

@Dorex45 I want progress for Bitcoin as well. I don’t think these OPRETURN changes are the best way to do it. If this is the only solution, then I feel the risks don’t outweigh the rewards.

That being said, wouldn’t it be worth sacrificing a little more time for Bitcoin’s scaling progress, in order to look into alternate methods a little more? Isn’t it worth quelling the out-of-control, online ‘debates,’ in the name of Bitcoin security?

fanquake commented at 3:01 pm on October 2, 2025: member

Moved the release date forward a week, as we still need to do at least an rc3.

tehcmanmax commented at 8:43 pm on October 2, 2025: none

Moved the release date forward a week, as we still need to do at least an rc3.

Move it to the next year

fanquake commented at 10:36 am on October 6, 2025: member

An rc3 has been tagged: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v30.0rc3.

zsaiwj commented at 7:52 am on October 7, 2025: none

V30 倒计时 💛💙💚

Dorex45 commented at 7:54 am on October 7, 2025: none

V30 😃

axelpale commented at 8:59 pm on October 7, 2025: none

We know how it must feel frustrating to delay all the great hard work done by the developers towards v30. There must be a lot of good stuff in v30.0. However, the community seems to be deeply divided on philosophical issues and risks associated with the purpose-built ability to attach relatively large chunks of unencrypted data to transactions. The fear is that some extremely disgusting data end up in the chain forever for everybody to read. If it is disgusting enough, every news outlet, politician, school teacher, and mother will hear about it. There will be solutions. Maybe the encryption of the data must be enforced by the protocol, or the byte limit set so that it cannot represent too much, or something else. The community needs to reach some consensus. This issue needs to be approached with the NASA’s good ol’ Going-to-the-Moon mentality. Like, design and test until it is robust enough to face the harsh conditions of the (cyber)space. The Fix-in-Production mentality did not suit NASA and it does not suit Bitcoin.

fazle1337-del commented at 7:57 am on October 8, 2025: none

I don’t understand why we want to limit he ability of the node operator. Does this not disenfranchise the people and move to a more centralised governance. The problem is, once malicious data is onchain, it’s going to need a hard fork to remove it. Can this be discussed further before the release happens please

Dorex45 commented at 8:27 am on October 8, 2025: none

Each node can configure it’s policy rules as it sees fit and transactions must first pass consensus rules before considering policy. This means that there is no risk that using different policy rules will break consensus. Another way to say this is that standard transactions are a subset of valid transactions.

Dorex45 commented at 8:28 am on October 8, 2025: none

Candidate Release V30 ACK

fanquake commented at 8:49 am on October 8, 2025: member

Binaries for v30.0rc3 are available: https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-30.0/test.rc3/.

jonbourne commented at 1:27 pm on October 9, 2025: none

Please do not release this version now. Reschedule and rethink. It has many people who disagree with choices made, and they have not been discussed enough to release the code. This is a very important turning point, and the implications are very difficult, if not impossible, to take back. Specifically, remove any code that touches OP_RETURN. Please do not release this version.

naturallaw777 commented at 1:49 pm on October 9, 2025: none

Yes, do not release this version! The OP_RETURN limit increase will allow bad actors to harm the network in irrevocable ways.

l0rinc commented at 1:54 pm on October 9, 2025: contributor

@aimtiaz11, @naturallaw777: this isn’t the place to discuss that topic, please read https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/response-to-pieter-wuilles-stackexchange-answer-re-nuking-the-opreturn-filter/1991/11 for a motivation for these changes and why it’s just a mitigation for the problem. Feel free to respond there, but this topic is about the release schedule, let’s keep it that way.

pinheadmz commented at 1:55 pm on October 9, 2025: member

Off topic comments will be removed and users banned for at least one day. See https://github.com/bitcoin-core/meta/discussions/18

atanasna commented at 1:57 pm on October 9, 2025: none

Dear core, you have been a crucial part of bitcoin for many many years and we are all thankfull for all your efforts.

What you are doing with this update is not only degrading your own reputation(this is not an opinion but a fact proven by the 20+% of node operators moving to knots) but also putting at risk the single thing that can save us from the jaws of the tyrannical regime that the banks, fiat money and governments have systemically put us into.

Bitcoin will continue with or without you and the network will sooner or later move past core but at least think what you will be remember with

Dorex45 commented at 1:59 pm on October 9, 2025: none

Candidate Release V30 ACK.

TheQuantumPhysicist commented at 2:35 pm on October 9, 2025: none

Besides the tribal us vs them. Mempool unification vs relay policy.

I will say this because it’s necessary.

Possible legal consequences for bitcoin core devs:

Please understand that many blockchain projects tried to absolve themselves from what their users have done in court (Samourai wallet, for example, which pled guilty for what their users did). That doesn’t work. A judge in the criminal case investigation will ask “why didn’t this happen before”, and then the judge will learn that half the internet warned bitcoin core devs that people might store illegal things on the blockchain in plaintext, but bitcoin core devs ignored all the warnings under the pretense of some technical wishes. Please consult with your lawyers to check under as many jurisdictions as possible whether you can be absolved from what the users do because of removing the filters, which at least made the anonymity of storing data much harder, since miners have to willingly accept the data and store it, which held them liable before Core v30. One bad picture or document in a transaction, and your lives could be flipped upside down.

I wish you the best of luck. But please understand that no matter the reason, nothing justifies taking this amount of risk. I hope I’m wrong.

weerden-io commented at 2:36 pm on October 9, 2025: none

Hello Core,

I’ve never contributed to or interacted directly with the Bitcoin codebase or developer community, but I’ve been following this discussion closely from the sidelines. From that perspective, I think changing the OP_RETURN limit is too controversial and risky. This parameter is part of Bitcoin’s base consensus rules, and altering it introduces unnecessary uncertainty.

Bitcoin has matured to a point where predictability/stability is far more valuable than new flexibility. Expanding OP_RETURN risks unintended consequences, increased data usage, validation bloat, and long-term maintenance costs. I believe the current limit should stay as is.

I’ve also noticed that some comments expressing similar concerns have been censored or hidden. I expect mine might be as well, but I still want to respectfully voice my concern.

bitcoin locked this on Oct 9, 2025

glozow added the label Tracking Issue on Oct 9, 2025

glozow commented at 8:08 pm on October 9, 2025: member

v30.0 tagged: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v30.0

fanquake commented at 10:53 am on October 10, 2025: member