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

Move sync progress logic to new module #1875

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jul 8, 2020

Conversation

Anviking
Copy link
Collaborator

@Anviking Anviking commented Jul 7, 2020

Issue Number

#1869

Overview

  • Make the sync progress logic easier to grasp by moving it to its own module
  • Add a note about the calculation going to break in era-transitions

Comments

  • I believe we may have to have to provide several methods of calculating the sync-progress. Maybe we need a different one for jormungandr. I think a new module is neat regardless.

@Anviking Anviking self-assigned this Jul 7, 2020
@Anviking
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Anviking commented Jul 8, 2020

bors r+

iohk-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2020
1875: Move sync progress logic to new module r=Anviking a=Anviking

# Issue Number

#1869 

# Overview

- [x] Make the sync progress logic easier to grasp by moving it to its own module
- [x] Add a note about the calculation going to break in era-transitions


# Comments

- I believe we may have to have to provide _several_ methods of calculating the sync-progress. Maybe we need a different one for jormungandr. I think a new module is neat regardless.

<!-- Additional comments or screenshots to attach if any -->

<!-- 
Don't forget to:

 ✓ Self-review your changes to make sure nothing unexpected slipped through
 ✓ Assign yourself to the PR
 ✓ Assign one or several reviewer(s)
 ✓ Once created, link this PR to its corresponding ticket
 ✓ Assign the PR to a corresponding milestone
 ✓ Acknowledge any changes required to the Wiki
-->


Co-authored-by: Johannes Lund <johannes.lund@iohk.io>
@iohk-bors
Copy link
Contributor

iohk-bors bot commented Jul 8, 2020

Build failed

We may need to implement multiple ways of calculating sync progress.
Having it in its own module makes it easier to grasp.
I am however leaving some roundtrips in TypesSpec.
@Anviking Anviking force-pushed the anviking/1869/move-sync-progress branch from 24a1933 to 3ce848a Compare July 8, 2020 15:00
@Anviking
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Anviking commented Jul 8, 2020

bors r+

iohk-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2020
1875: Move sync progress logic to new module r=Anviking a=Anviking

# Issue Number

#1869 

# Overview

- [x] Make the sync progress logic easier to grasp by moving it to its own module
- [x] Add a note about the calculation going to break in era-transitions


# Comments

- I believe we may have to have to provide _several_ methods of calculating the sync-progress. Maybe we need a different one for jormungandr. I think a new module is neat regardless.

<!-- Additional comments or screenshots to attach if any -->

<!-- 
Don't forget to:

 ✓ Self-review your changes to make sure nothing unexpected slipped through
 ✓ Assign yourself to the PR
 ✓ Assign one or several reviewer(s)
 ✓ Once created, link this PR to its corresponding ticket
 ✓ Assign the PR to a corresponding milestone
 ✓ Acknowledge any changes required to the Wiki
-->


1877: Fix new warnings in HLint v3.1.6 r=Anviking a=rvl

### Overview

HLint v3.1.6 can find more unused language extensions.

### Comments

CI version update in PR #1857.


Co-authored-by: Johannes Lund <johannes.lund@iohk.io>
Co-authored-by: Rodney Lorrimar <rodney.lorrimar@iohk.io>
@iohk-bors
Copy link
Contributor

iohk-bors bot commented Jul 8, 2020

Build failed (retrying...)

@iohk-bors
Copy link
Contributor

iohk-bors bot commented Jul 8, 2020

@iohk-bors iohk-bors bot merged commit ef39e61 into master Jul 8, 2020
@iohk-bors iohk-bors bot deleted the anviking/1869/move-sync-progress branch July 8, 2020 18:18
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.

None yet

2 participants