Skip to content

/ bitcoin

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

MOVEONLY: Move non-consensus functions out of pow #7311

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 2, 2016
Merged

MOVEONLY: Move non-consensus functions out of pow #7311

merged 1 commit into from Feb 2, 2016

Conversation

@jtimon
Copy link
Member

jtimon commented Jan 7, 2016

Move this two non-consensus functions out of pow.o (which will become part of the consensus building module/package, see #7091 ):

  • GetBlockProof
  • GetBlockProofEquivalentTime
@jtimon jtimon changed the title MOVEONLY: non-consensus: from pow to chain: MOVEONLY: Move non-consensus functions out of pow Jan 7, 2016
@dcousens
Copy link
Contributor

dcousens commented Jan 8, 2016

utACK ff97050
@paveljanik
Copy link
Contributor

paveljanik commented Jan 8, 2016

We test these functions in test/pow_tests.cpp. OK to keep them there?

ACK
@jonasschnelli
Copy link
Member

jonasschnelli commented Jan 8, 2016

ACK
Can confirm as move-only (ff97050913206522b22ef80d4241b82a8aba27f0).
@MarcoFalke
Copy link
Member

MarcoFalke commented Jan 8, 2016

utACK ff97050
@jtimon
Copy link
Member Author

jtimon commented Jan 8, 2016

@paveljanik I'm focusing on putting all the code in the consensus building package first and we can take care of the tests when the C API is complete and we separate libconsensus to its own repository like libsecp256k1. So, yes, we should separate the tests at some point, but I'll leave that of the scope of this PR for now.
@jtimon
Copy link
Member Author

jtimon commented Jan 8, 2016

Added a "squashme" commit with @paveljanik 's nit.
@dcousens
Copy link
Contributor

dcousens commented Jan 10, 2016

re-ACK @ 270b60e
@MarcoFalke
Copy link
Member

MarcoFalke commented Jan 10, 2016

utACK 270b60e
@instagibbs
Copy link
Member

instagibbs commented Jan 11, 2016

utACK 270b60e97ee2c2d18de97875069307714fe79d07

Confirmed move-only.
@jtimon
Copy link
Member Author

jtimon commented Jan 11, 2016

@laanwj should I squash already?
@jtimon
MOVEONLY: non-consensus: from pow to chain:
Loading status checks…
e867561 
- GetBlockProof
- GetBlockProofEquivalentTime
@jtimon jtimon force-pushed the jtimon:consensus-pow-moveonly-0.13.99 branch to e867561 Jan 12, 2016
@MarcoFalke
Copy link
Member

MarcoFalke commented Jan 14, 2016

re-ACK e867561 (rebase of 270b60e )
@dcousens
Copy link
Contributor

dcousens commented Jan 15, 2016

reACK e867561
@dcousens dcousens mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2016
Merged
@jtimon
Copy link
Member Author

jtimon commented Jan 28, 2016

@laanwj anything holding this?
@sipa
Copy link
Member

sipa commented Feb 2, 2016

utACK
@laanwj
Copy link
Member

laanwj commented Feb 2, 2016

utACK e867561
@laanwj laanwj merged commit e867561 into bitcoin:master Feb 2, 2016
1 check passed
1 check passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
laanwj added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 2, 2016
@laanwj
Merge #7311: MOVEONLY: Move non-consensus functions out of pow
Verified
This commit was signed with a verified signature.
laanwj Wladimir J. van der Laan
GPG key ID: 74810B012346C9A6 Learn about signing commits
Loading status checks…
47ac04e 
e867561 MOVEONLY: non-consensus: from pow to chain: (Jorge Timón)
@jtimon jtimon mentioned this pull request Feb 14, 2016
Closed
codablock added a commit to codablock/dash that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2017
@laanwj @codablock
Merge bitcoin#7311: MOVEONLY: Move non-consensus functions out of pow
3448bc7 
e867561 MOVEONLY: non-consensus: from pow to chain: (Jorge Timón)
codablock added a commit to codablock/dash that referenced this pull request Dec 11, 2017
@laanwj @codablock
Merge bitcoin#7311: MOVEONLY: Move non-consensus functions out of pow
a65f7b7 
e867561 MOVEONLY: non-consensus: from pow to chain: (Jorge Timón)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Refactoring
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants
@jtimon @dcousens @paveljanik @jonasschnelli @MarcoFalke @instagibbs @sipa @laanwj
You can’t perform that action at this time.