## The second param of listsinceblock

From [issue 8752](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8752#issuecomment-247988691)

> The second parameter (target confirmation) is quite strange and should probably be better > documented in the RPC help of listsinceblock (check original comment: #199 (comment))

From the actual docs here is it is:

> target-confirmations:    (numeric, optional) The confirmations required, must be 1 or more

However, that's misleading at best. I've seen at least one project thinking that `target-confirmations` means "filter to only show transactions of n target-confirmations". It's a weird param but I'd document it as

> target-confirmations: (numeric, optional) Return the hash of the block that has target-confirmations of confirmations, for use in a further call to listsinceblock
## Transactions confirmations

Says:

> "confirmations": n,       (numeric) The number of confirmations for the transaction. Available for 'send' and 'receive' category of transactions.

It should also say when it's < 0, it means the transaction conflicted that many blocks ago
## bip125-replaceable

There's an undocumented field of transactions "bip125-replaceable" which I believe has three possibilities "yes" "no" and "unknown"  (under what circumstances it says unknown, should also be documented)

"    \"redeemScript\" : n        (string) The redeemScript if scriptPubKey is P2SH\n"
            "    \"spendable\" : xxx,        (bool) Whether we have the private keys to spend this output\n"
            "    \"solvable\" : xxx          (bool) Whether we know how to spend this output, ignoring the lack of keys\n"
            "  }\n"
            "  ,...\n"
            "]\n"
            "\nExamples\n"
            + HelpExampleCli("listunspent", "")
            + HelpExampleCli("listunspent", "6 9999999 \"[\\\"1PGFqEzfmQch1gKD3ra4k18PNj3tTUUSqg\\\",\\\"1LtvqCaApEdUGFkpKMM4MstjcaL4dKg8SP\\\"]\"")
            + HelpExampleRpc("listunspent", "6, 9999999 \"[\\\"1PGFqEzfmQch1gKD3ra4k18PNj3tTUUSqg\\\",\\\"1LtvqCaApEdUGFkpKMM4MstjcaL4dKg8SP\\\"]\"")
        );
    RPCTypeCheck(request.params, boost::assign::list_of(UniValue::VNUM)(UniValue::VNUM)(UniValue::VARR));
    int nMinDepth = 1;
    if (request.params.size() > 0)
        nMinDepth = request.params[0].get_int();
    int nMaxDepth = 9999999;
    if (request.params.size() > 1)
        nMaxDepth = request.params[1].get_int();
    set<CBitcoinAddress> setAddress;
    if (request.params.size() > 2) {
        UniValue inputs = request.params[2].get_array();
        for (unsigned int idx = 0; idx < inputs.size(); idx++) {
            const UniValue& input = inputs[idx];
            CBitcoinAddress address(input.get_str());
            if (!address.IsValid())
                throw JSONRPCError(RPC_INVALID_ADDRESS_OR_KEY, string("Invalid Bitcoin address: ")+input.get_str());
            if (setAddress.count(address))
                throw JSONRPCError(RPC_INVALID_PARAMETER, string("Invalid parameter, duplicated address: ")+input.get_str());
           setAddress.insert(address);
        }