Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • Jul 29 2020 01:16
  • Jul 22 2020 07:07
  • Jul 22 2020 07:07
    Travis kseo/codechain-rpc-js (license) passed (1)
  • Mar 20 2020 06:28
    MSNTCS opened #1962
  • Mar 20 2020 06:27
    MSNTCS commented #1961
  • Mar 20 2020 06:25
    MSNTCS closed #1961
  • Mar 19 2020 08:02
    MSNTCS review_requested #1961
  • Mar 19 2020 08:02
    MSNTCS opened #1961
  • Mar 03 2020 02:37
    ScarletBlue edited #1948
  • Mar 03 2020 02:37
    ScarletBlue edited #1931
  • Mar 02 2020 00:41
    ScarletBlue edited #1915
  • Mar 02 2020 00:41
    ScarletBlue edited #1915
  • Feb 27 2020 00:09
    sgkim126 closed #1959
  • Feb 27 2020 00:09

    sgkim126 on master

    Bug fix in on_request_commit_me… (compare)

  • Feb 25 2020 09:41
    majecty labeled #1960
  • Feb 25 2020 09:41
    majecty opened #1960
  • Feb 17 2020 02:10
    majecty commented #1959
  • Feb 14 2020 23:13
    sgkim126 review_requested #1959
  • Feb 14 2020 23:13
    sgkim126 review_requested #1959
  • Feb 14 2020 23:13
    sgkim126 opened #1959
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@Remagpie I commented.
Joonmo Yang
@Remagpie
Thx. I applied the suggestion.
Kwang Yul Seo
@kseo
@sgkim126 what’s this issue about? would you describe more?
CodeChain-io/codechain#1064
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@kseo updated
I'll try to make e2e tests stable. It fails too much now.
Kwang Yul Seo
@kseo
@sgkim126 sounds good. please share the root cause of the flakyness before you start fixing it
Kwang Yul Seo
@kseo
@sgkim126 let’s discuss this issue next week. please take a look at it
CodeChain-io/codechain#1884
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@kseo Okay
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@foriequal0 Why do you archive binaries for pull requests?
SeongChan Lee
@foriequal0
@sgkim126 I’ve left it for just in case and I just didn’t bothered about it. Keeping it doesn’t take some quota and it’ll be removed after 90 days of retention[1].
[1] https://help.github.com/en/actions/automating-your-workflow-with-github-actions/persisting-workflow-data-using-artifacts#about-workflow-artifacts
Joonmo Yang
@Remagpie
@sgkim126 Could add your review to this PR? CodeChain-io/codechain#1900
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@Remagpie I'll do it now.
Park Juhyung
@majecty
CodeChain 2.2.1 is released! The CodeChain Main network and Corgi network are using the 2.2.1 binary.
Kwang Yul Seo
@kseo
good job!
Park Juhyung
@majecty
I'm reviewing "Refactor to introduce the snapshot sync" PR CodeChain-io/codechain#1916
Park Juhyung
@majecty

https://github.com/CodeChain-io/codechain/pull/1916/commits/3a42b52057f4eb9fcce732711a169525a2aafef3

I like this Commit in the PR. Before the commit, code is divided according to whether the validator set is dynamic or static. After the commit, the code is split by what it does first and split again by the dynamic or static validator set. Thanks the change, it is easy to track what's different between the dynamic validator set and the static validator set.

Joonmo Yang
@Remagpie

I like this Commit in the PR. Before the commit, code is divided according to whether the validator set is dynamic or static. After the commit, the code is split by what it does first and split again by the dynamic or static validator set. Thanks the change, it is easy to track what's different between the dynamic validator set and the static validator set.

:smile:

Park Juhyung
@majecty
There is a hidden assumption that move_to_step should be called after jump_to_height function is called. I'll add comments about the assumption in the jump_to_height function.
JinGyeong Jeong
@joojis
I will review CodeChain-io/codechain#1920 now
Joonmo Yang
@Remagpie
Is there any reason why we're using chai-as-promised for the e2e tests?
I thought async/await and try/catch would be enough.
JinGyeong Jeong
@joojis
@Remagpie I guess there’s no special reason.
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@Remagpie I think it's a matter of taste. chai-as-promised shows the intention clearly by the name rejected/rejectedWith/fulfilled, but it also needs boilerplate code to import.
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@/all Have we used the null consensus engine? Why not removing it?
Park Juhyung
@majecty
I've never seen code that using the null consensus engine. I agree with you. Let's remove it.
Park Juhyung
@majecty
I'm reviewing CodeChain-io/foundry#1. I'm happy to see this PR.
Joonmo Yang
@Remagpie
I think it can be useful for unit testings. Is solo consensus enough for the tests?
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@Remagpie I'll check it. I think there is little difference between solo and null engine.
@kseo CodeChain-io/codechain#1930 please review it.
Kwang Yul Seo
@kseo
@sgkim126 merged
Kwang Yul Seo
@kseo
@sgkim126 do we need to merge CodeChain-io/codechain#1930 into foundrytoo?
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@kseo Yes, we should. I'll do it soon.
Park Juhyung
@majecty
I'll remove Asset related code in Foundry. I'll modify these modules: State, RPC, and VM. I'll remove related e2e tests.
@sgkim126 Please tell me if you think there will be a significant merge conflict with your commits.
Kwang Yul Seo
@kseo
@sgkim126 are you working on CodeChain-io/foundry#1
Park Juhyung
@majecty
I've started removing Assets in Foundry.
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@kseo Yes, I'm still working on. I'll remove the WIP prefix when finished.
@majecty The parts you touched are not related to my parts. I think only Cargo.lock will conflict.
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@majecty I removed some RPCs also, but it will not be a problem.
Park Juhyung
@majecty
OK.
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
Joonmo Yang
@Remagpie
:+1:
Park Juhyung
@majecty
@sgkim126 What do you think about running cargo fix --edition-idioms in the foundry project?
We are using extern crate in many cases, but from the 2018 edition, we don't need it in most cases.
https://doc.rust-lang.org/edition-guide/rust-2018/module-system/path-clarity.html#no-more-extern-crate
Park Juhyung
@majecty
@sgkim126 I'll remove shard related code from the Foundry while removing Assets.
Seulgi Kim
@sgkim126
@majecty I totally agree about cargo fix --edition-idioms. Please do it.
Kwang Yul Seo
@kseo
@sgkim126 it’s already done.CodeChain-io/foundry#10
Park Juhyung
@majecty
I removed all Asset and Shared related code in Foundry. I'm fixing clippy errors.
Park Juhyung
@majecty
I'm removing Asset related e2e tests.
Park Juhyung
@majecty
@sgkim126 What do you think about adding a dummy transaction that uses shards? If we remove all asset-related transactions, there will be no transactions that use shard states.
I'm considering not to remove MintAsset instead of a new dummy transaction.