doc: Fix fee field in getblock RPC result #34702

1. 
   nervana21 commented at 3:00 pm on February 28, 2026: contributor

   The fee field in the getblock RPC result (verbosity 2 and 3) may be omitted when block undo data is not available. Marking it optional in the RPCResult aligns the documented schema with the runtime behavior.
2. DrahtBot added the label Docs on Feb 28, 2026
3. 
   DrahtBot commented at 3:00 pm on February 28, 2026: contributor

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

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	instagibbs, w0xlt, mercie-ux

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <!–meta-tag:bot-skip–> into the comment that the bot should ignore.

4. 
   instagibbs commented at 3:18 pm on February 28, 2026: member

   I can’t recall, but would a functional test fail in master when it doesn’t end up existing in a response? If so, worth making a regression test.
5. 
   maflcko commented at 3:32 pm on February 28, 2026: member

   The check may be skipped due to RPCResult::Type::ELISION?

   0static std::optional<UniValue::VType> ExpectedType(RPCResult::Type type)
   1{
   2    using Type = RPCResult::Type;
   3    switch (type) {
   4    case Type::ELISION:
   5    case Type::ANY: {
   6        return std::nullopt;
   7    }
   8...
   

6. doc: Fix `fee` field in `getblock` RPC result

   The `fee` field in the `getblock` RPC result (verbosity 2 and 3) may be
   omitted when block undo data is not available. Marking it optional in
   the `RPCResult` aligns the documented schema with the runtime behavior.

   f580cc7e9f
7. nervana21 force-pushed on Mar 1, 2026
8. 
   nervana21 commented at 5:14 pm on March 1, 2026: contributor

   I can’t recall, but would a functional test fail in master when it doesn’t end up existing in a response? If so, worth making a regression test.

   This behavior is already covered by a functional test:

   https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/744d47fcee0d32a71154292699bfdecf954a6065/test/functional/rpc_blockchain.py#L766-L767

   So I think only the documentation needs to be updated. Is there anything else that should be considered?

9. instagibbs approved
10. 
    instagibbs commented at 2:25 pm on March 2, 2026: member

    ACK f580cc7e9f26331f7f03a8bbc5722521eb159bb2
11. 
    w0xlt commented at 7:13 pm on March 2, 2026: contributor

    ACK f580cc7e9f26331f7f03a8bbc5722521eb159bb2
12. 
    mercie-ux commented at 7:41 pm on March 2, 2026: none

    ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/f580cc7e9f26331f7f03a8bbc5722521eb159bb2

Contributors
nervana21 DrahtBot instagibbs maflcko w0xlt mercie-ux

Labels
Docs