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

docs: move RFC_0120 to stable #25

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Nov 15, 2022
Merged

docs: move RFC_0120 to stable #25

merged 9 commits into from
Nov 15, 2022

Conversation

SWvheerden
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This moved RFC_0120 to stable.
Sort maintainers list by alphabetical order.

@CjS77
Copy link
Collaborator

CjS77 commented Oct 11, 2022

Add a Change Log please (and fill it in)

@CjS77
Copy link
Collaborator

CjS77 commented Oct 21, 2022

@SWvheerden
fix broken link
882729c 
add burn rfc rules
@CjS77
Copy link
Collaborator

CjS77 commented Oct 26, 2022

Fix the link in L#86 and the suggestion should fix the LaTeX error, and we should be good here.

CjS77
CjS77 reviewed Oct 26, 2022
View reviewed changes
src/RFC-0120_Consensus.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@CjS77 CjS77 added the P-merge label Oct 26, 2022
@CjS77
Copy link
Collaborator

CjS77 commented Oct 26, 2022

pneding changes..
ACK

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

The transaction input section is missing Tariscript fields and the maturity check seems wrong to me

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

I would also say that there is a set of features that are allowed and a number of versions that are allowed in blocks, inputs, outputs and features. Tariscript also has a restriction on the version and opcodes allowed

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

There is no mention of the Tariscript balance checks done

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

Where hashing is mentioned, the domain for the hasher should also be specified

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

Total difficulty is no longer part of the header and should be removed

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

The script offset is referred to as total_script_offset in one place and script_offset in another

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

The section Total accumulated proof of work should mention that this is a u128 to allow for the product of two u64 numbers

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

Add kernels are sorted by excess_sig to Transaction Ordering section

@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

"Any time that is more than the FTL is rejected until such a time that it is not less more than the FTL."

@SWvheerden SWvheerden mentioned this pull request Nov 9, 2022
Closed
@stringhandler
Copy link
Collaborator

stringhandler commented Nov 9, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Fixes #43

@stringhandler stringhandler linked an issue Nov 9, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request
[RFC 120] The section on transaction input is missing and has inaccuracies #43
Closed
stringhandler
stringhandler previously approved these changes Nov 15, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@stringhandler stringhandler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

just one more

src/RFC-0120_Consensus.md Show resolved Hide resolved
CjS77
CjS77 approved these changes Nov 15, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@CjS77 CjS77 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@CjS77 CjS77 merged commit 029bf65 into tari-project:main Nov 15, 2022
agubarev pushed a commit to agubarev/tari-rfcs that referenced this pull request Nov 18, 2022
@SWvheerden @CjS77 @agubarev
docs: move RFC_0120 to stable (tari-project#25)
3a54a9e 
* move to stable

* add change log

* fix broken link
add burn rfc rules

* Update src/RFC-0120_Consensus.md

* fix broken link to tx kernel
Add tx kernel to glossary

* fix typo

* updates to RFC 0120

* add kernel sorting

* Update src/RFC-0120_Consensus.md

Co-authored-by: Cayle Sharrock <CjS77@users.noreply.github.com>
@SWvheerden SWvheerden deleted the sw_rfc_120 branch April 12, 2023 06:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@CjS77 CjS77 CjS77 approved these changes

@stringhandler stringhandler stringhandler left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
P-merge P-reviews_required
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[RFC 120] The section on transaction input is missing and has inaccuracies
3 participants
@SWvheerden @CjS77 @stringhandler