feat: generalize ehf activation#5824
Conversation
|
you can add also changes from |
5f12f6d to
dac9cb3
Compare
UdjinM6
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM in general 👍 however I'd like to squash few lines to make no-whitespaces diff look a bit more compact
778d2bc to
721770e
Compare
721770e to
0fc3599
Compare
|
@knst Can you please help to coordinate a devnet test with this build and 20.0.4 ensuring that both activate EHF as expected and no issues are detected? |
|
Guix Automation has failed due to the HEAD commit not being signed by an authorized core-team member. Please rebase and sign or push a new empty signed commit to allow Guix build to happen. |
|
Can't push a commit here due to lack of permission issues @panleone; please check this box; or I'd have to create a new PR in order to get a build here |
hmm looks this option is not available since I forked dash from an organisation (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/75596018/allow-edits-from-maintainers-does-not-work-when-the-pr-is-created-by-a-group) |
|
This pull request has conflicts, please rebase. |
Try to sign any ehf deployment that can be activated and that hasn't been mined on chain yet. Also when receiving a new recovered signature try to match it with any ehf deployment which hasn't been mined on chain yet
To avoid copy and pasting future ehf deployments activation functions
0fc3599 to
1821d92
Compare
|
Guix Automation has failed due to the HEAD commit not being signed by an authorized core-team member. Please rebase and sign or push a new empty signed commit to allow Guix build to happen. |
|
had to rebase since there was a conflict |
PastaPastaPasta
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
utACK for merge via merge commit


Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Try to sign/mine any ehf deployment and not only mn_rr. As asked in the review this decouples (and improves) commit e24cb23 from PR #5799
What was done?
See commit description
How Has This Been Tested?
Breaking Changes
Checklist: