Sorry, but today the sun is not out for Bitcoin. A few Core Devs gaslit and steamrolled their way into merging a pull request that was vehemently opposed and not even well-supported by "Core Devs" at large. Rather than showing the clear opposition (the "nays" / NACKs) as was usual for prior PRs the summary was changed to only show the "ayes" (ACKs). This disingenuous move made it look like the PR was entirely supported. Amazingly, after approving, the PR now shows the ACKs AND NACKs. Reading through the details in the PR shows a very different story.

GitHub

policy: uncap datacarrier by default by instagibbs · Pull Request #32406 · bitcoin/bitcoin

Retains the -datacarrier* args, marks them as deprecated, and does not require another startup argument for multiple OP_RETURN outputs. If a user h...

Is this the day Bitcoin begins to die? I surely hope not (although "hope" was a word used repeatedly as reasoning for why this PR would actually benefit Bitcoin, as in "we hope this will work"). FWIW, 3% of Core Devs wrote an open letter expressing their opinion (obviously having permission to the Core website), with little-to-no proper debate that includes the majority in dissent. It's time to take a serious look at the Bitcoin Core process before it becomes a worldwide virtual government organization. Who is paying Gloria Zhao (Chaincode)? Who is paying Peter Todd as he defends Citrea as the primary use case for the change, citing concerns for "millions of dollars of [VC] funding" (his words), and appeasing large mining companies? How are we not seriously concerned about this? "GM" has now replaced "how 'bout that game last night".