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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Use protocol_upgrade_num_epochs for protocol upgrades #3313

Closed
bowenwang1996 opened this issue Sep 13, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

Use protocol_upgrade_num_epochs for protocol upgrades #3313

bowenwang1996 opened this issue Sep 13, 2020 · 2 comments
Assignees
@bowenwang1996
Labels
A-upgradability Area: Anything related to config and binary upgradability

Comments

@bowenwang1996
Copy link
Collaborator

Today we do not use protocol_upgrade_num_epochs for protocol upgrades and this means that there is only one epoch time between when the new protocol version is voted and when it is instantiated. We should support protocol_upgrade_num_epochs in the future to give more time for validators to react to the upcoming upgrade.
@bowenwang1996 bowenwang1996 added the A-upgradability Area: Anything related to config and binary upgradability label Sep 13, 2020
@bowenwang1996 bowenwang1996 self-assigned this Sep 13, 2020
@bowenwang1996 bowenwang1996 mentioned this issue Sep 13, 2020
Closed
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jul 1, 2021

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity in the last 2 months.
It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs.
Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the S-stale label Jul 1, 2021
@bowenwang1996
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Superseded by near/NEPs#205

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@bowenwang1996 bowenwang1996

Labels
A-upgradability Area: Anything related to config and binary upgradability
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@bowenwang1996