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

Dao fix issues with majority hash #2360

Conversation

ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link
Member

@sqrrm sqrrm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK

Added some fixes to spelling mistakes and variable naming.

Otherwise this looks better, waiting for the end of batch parsing and checking the current phase at that height before publishing vote. I wonder if our usage of chainHeight, blocHeight, height and what not is lacking since we're getting confused. Perhaps better naming would help us understand better what we're doing.

sqrrm and others added 4 commits February 3, 2019 18:47
Co-Authored-By: ManfredKarrer <mk@nucleo.io>
…ealService.java

Co-Authored-By: ManfredKarrer <mk@nucleo.io>
…ealService.java

Co-Authored-By: ManfredKarrer <mk@nucleo.io>
…ealService.java

Co-Authored-By: ManfredKarrer <mk@nucleo.io>
@ManfredKarrer
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes we should rename once blockHeight params to be always the same.

@sqrrm
Copy link
Member

sqrrm commented Feb 3, 2019

Yes we should rename once blockHeight params to be always the same.

I think we might need to differentiate between parsed height, known last block height, height for a certain block and perhaps even more and use different but consistent names.

@ManfredKarrer ManfredKarrer merged commit 2615464 into bisq-network:master Feb 3, 2019
@ManfredKarrer ManfredKarrer deleted the dao-fix-issues-with-majority-hash branch February 3, 2019 18:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants