Skip to content
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(docs): Fix NU6-related documentation #8949

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix(docs): Fix NU6-related documentation #8949

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

arya2
Copy link
Contributor

@arya2 arya2 commented Oct 18, 2024

Motivation

We want to update the documentation around NU6 funding streams now that draft funding allocation ZIP has been assigned a ZIP number.

We also want to avoid the panics listed as examples in the audit report that could arise from incorrect network parameters.

Note that there are many more potential panics that could be triggered with incorrect network parameters, and ideally those (and many other panics in Zebra) could be replaced with errors, but this should be done when cleaning up tech debt. Leaving these panics should be okay for now, as the hard-coded Mainnet and Testnet parameters have been manually verified, any configured Testnet parameters should be validated when parsing the Zebra's configuration, and avoiding panics in these cases would still leave Zebra unable to correctly validate blocks and transactions, so the benefit of replacing them with errors is limited.

Closes #8903.
Part of #8904.

Solution

  • Removes panics listed as examples in audit report
  • Fixes outstanding documentation issues listed in audit report
  • Addresses outstanding documentation TODOs added during NU6 implementation (except a couple in tests that are waiting on a Mainnet NU6 activation height)

Related fixes:

  • Addresses an old TODO in subsidy_is_valid() related to using the correct slow start interval on configured Testnets

Follow-up Work

Replace other panics in Zebra where it would be better to return an error.

PR Author's Checklist

  • The PR name will make sense to users.
  • The solution is tested.
  • The documentation is up to date.
  • The PR has a priority label.

PR Reviewer's Checklist

  • The PR Author's checklist is complete.
  • The PR resolves the issue.

@arya2 arya2 added C-bug Category: This is a bug A-docs Area: Documentation C-enhancement Category: This is an improvement NU-6 Network Upgrade: NU6 specific tasks C-trivial Category: A trivial change that is not worth mentioning in the CHANGELOG P-Medium ⚡ labels Oct 18, 2024
@arya2 arya2 self-assigned this Oct 18, 2024
@arya2 arya2 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 18, 2024 21:45
@arya2 arya2 requested review from upbqdn and removed request for a team October 18, 2024 21:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-docs Area: Documentation C-bug Category: This is a bug C-enhancement Category: This is an improvement C-trivial Category: A trivial change that is not worth mentioning in the CHANGELOG NU-6 Network Upgrade: NU6 specific tasks P-Medium ⚡
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

NU6 Audit: Suggestion 1: Update Code Comments and ZIP Documentation
1 participant