-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix: allow epochs to transition in a single block, and boot cleanup #229
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
const BOOT_CODE_POX_BODY: &'static str = std::include_str!("pox.clar"); | ||
const BOOT_CODE_POX_TESTNET_CONSTS: &'static str = std::include_str!("pox-testnet.clar"); | ||
const BOOT_CODE_POX_MAINNET_CONSTS: &'static str = std::include_str!("pox-mainnet.clar"); | ||
pub const BOOT_CODE_LOCKUP: &'static str = std::include_str!("lockup.clar"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for doing this cleanup!!
src/chainstate/stacks/boot/mod.rs
Outdated
("subnet", &BOOT_CODE_SUBNET), | ||
("pox", &BOOT_CODE_POX_MAINNET), | ||
("lockup", BOOT_CODE_LOCKUP), | ||
("costs", BOOT_CODE_COSTS), | ||
("cost-voting", BOOT_CODE_COST_VOTING_MAINNET), | ||
("bns", &BOOT_CODE_BNS), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm... BNS is a bit weird within a subnet. Could we have a BNS contract in here that just implements transfers and the subnet-asset
trait, so that BNS names could be traded in a subnet? Wallets should probably use L1 BNS to lookup addresses when interacting on a subnet. I'd like to think about that some more, and either way, it doesn't need to be part of this PR, just noting some thoughts here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, that was my thought -- do you think it makes sense to delete the BNS contract in this PR as well for now, and leave the subnet-BNS contract as a separate issue?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, that sounds good. Whatever we end up with, we definitely don't want this BNS contract.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll open an issue for it.
Codecov Report
📣 This organization is not using Codecov’s GitHub App Integration. We recommend you install it so Codecov can continue to function properly for your repositories. Learn more @@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #229 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 91.19% 92.26% +1.06%
==========================================
Files 6 6
Lines 284 336 +52
==========================================
+ Hits 259 310 +51
- Misses 25 26 +1
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
0eea315
to
ae60247
Compare
This PR does a couple of things related to epoch transitions and boot code in the subnet node:
The integration tests all test this behavior now, because they used the default regtest epoch configurations.