-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 678
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
[clarity] Cast aggregated public key vote #4239
Conversation
Is this meant ot be built off of next? I don't see a corresponding PR for chore/pox-4-single-file Also make sure it is reabsed off of next and does not contain merge commits. I am seeing lots of unrelated commits / diffs and not sure if that is just because the target branch is not rebased properly on next or if this one was not properly rebased off of next or both. |
It is meant to be off the code that contains |
a9bd714
to
3461d20
Compare
8056694
to
e9fd4a9
Compare
987af2b
to
b758988
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## next #4239 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 52.88% 83.38% +30.50%
===========================================
Files 434 435 +1
Lines 308750 309245 +495
===========================================
+ Hits 163277 257873 +94596
+ Misses 145473 51372 -94101 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
This PR should be updated to merge into |
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.
Just had one comment in the clarity code.
Otherwise, LGTM -- this contract will need to be updated as the stackerdb/signer work changes to support more signers, but that can be handled in a follow-up PR.
Comments addressed |
/// Alice can vote successfully. | ||
/// Bob is out of the voting window. | ||
#[test] | ||
fn vote_for_aggregate_public_key_in_last_block() { |
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.
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.
My understanding was that we need to know the number of slots. This can happen only in the prepare phase. We check that the cycle was set as and registered in .signers.
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.
Aside from the one change potentially about voting window, I see no issue. We can also always address these sorts of comments in a follow up PR if its better to just merge :)
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
Description
This PR adds clarity code to tally a vote for the aggregated key for each cycle.
Applicable issues
Additional info (benefits, drawbacks, caveats)
Checklist
docs/rpc/openapi.yaml
andrpc-endpoints.md
for v2 endpoints,event-dispatcher.md
for new events)clarity-benchmarking
repobitcoin-tests.yml