-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 712
Support abritrary epochs in TestChainstate #6619
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
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Support abritrary epochs in TestChainstate #6619
Conversation
86e4e60 to
58cee2e
Compare
c3a3c2f to
c6ce521
Compare
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
c6ce521 to
1eb48de
Compare
… into feat/expand-consensus-test-to-support-pre-nakamoto-epochs
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
… into feat/expand-consensus-test-to-support-pre-nakamoto-epochs
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
…t to use all epochs GTE epoch 2.0 Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
… into feat/expand-consensus-test-to-support-pre-nakamoto-epochs
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is ❌ Your project check has failed because the head coverage (68.99%) is below the target coverage (80.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #6619 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 61.40% 68.99% +7.59%
===========================================
Files 574 574
Lines 354916 355501 +585
===========================================
+ Hits 217939 245284 +27345
+ Misses 136977 110217 -26760
... and 328 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
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 still need to finish the review of the changes in the consensus.rs file, but GREAT work!
...ts/snapshots/blockstack_lib__chainstate__tests__consensus__successfully_deploy_and_call.snap
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
… into feat/expand-consensus-test-to-support-pre-nakamoto-epochs
…ion handling pre epoch 2.0 Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
… into feat/expand-consensus-test-to-support-pre-nakamoto-epochs
3af95b7 to
76edefd
Compare
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.
Great work! I think we're very close here. The structure is already much clearer after the recent changes.
I agree with Federico's observations.That said, I'm fine either addressing these refinements (and my comment!) in this PR or deferring them to a follow-up one, now that the core logic is in a solid shape.
… into feat/expand-consensus-test-to-support-pre-nakamoto-epochs
…al update Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
…d use in ContractConsensusTest Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
9f46698 to
73541de
Compare
….0 reward set calculation rules apply Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
73541de to
a7c544d
Compare
Federico's suggestion ended up being a pretty minimal change after the cleanup round so I did as part of this PR. see 6069c36 :) |
…le is handled correctly Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
…be called elsewhere Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
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.
LGTM!
just added a bunch of nits for doc format consistency along the code.
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.
lgtm
…hainstate_config Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
…moto_transition_schedule Signed-off-by: Jacinta Ferrant <jacinta@stackslabs.com>
Replaces #6608