-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 302
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
Fix a few mistakes in the Penumbra Protocol docs #3710
Conversation
Just noticed this while reading the Penumbra protocol. Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com>
Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com>
Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com>
Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com>
@@ -62,5 +62,4 @@ addresses, allowing fine-grained control of delegation. | |||
|
|||
This diagram shows only the user-visible parts of the key hierarchy. | |||
Internally, each of these keys has different components, described in detail in | |||
the [Addresses and Keys](../protocol/addresses_keys.md) section of the | |||
[Cryptographic Protocol](../protocol.md) chapter. | |||
the [Addresses and Keys](../protocol/addresses_keys.md) chapter. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Addresses and Keys is now its own chapter, rather than being under the Cryptographic Protocol chapter.
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ description leaves the value balance unchanged. | |||
transaction's value balance, burning them, and producing a swap commitment for | |||
use in the second stage; | |||
|
|||
- **Sweep** descriptions perform the second phase of | |||
- **SwapClaim** descriptions perform the second phase of |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewers: please confirm that this change is correct.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep! Another terminology change we didn't update
- **Commission** descriptions are used by validators to [claim commission on | ||
staking rewards](../stake/validator-rewards.md) into shielded notes, | ||
adding unbonded stake to the transaction's value balance; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We actually got rid of these entirely, now the commission is paid out by the chain, so we could delete this bullet point.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got it — removed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM! Thanks for flagging this stuff, the spec has drifted a bit as we've focused on the protocol.
Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com>
* Fix repeated language in Transactions docs Just noticed this while reading the Penumbra protocol. Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com> * Fix reference to SwapClaims Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com> * Fix references to addresses + keys chapter Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com> * Remove reference to addresses + keys, which is now in its own chapter Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com> * Remove outdated bullet point Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com> --------- Signed-off-by: Jesse Pinho <jesse@jessepinho.com>
Just a couple things I noticed while reading the Penumbra protocol.