-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27
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
refactor(consensus): consensus takes a generic network receiver #112
refactor(consensus): consensus takes a generic network receiver #112
Conversation
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. Join @matan-starkware and the rest of your teammates on Graphite |
3396adf
to
eec4b9c
Compare
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.
Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @asmaastarkware and @matan-starkware)
a discussion (no related file):
We plan to change those channels to Box<dyn Sink/Stream>, and then this PR will be unnecessary
@eitanm-starkware could you do that on Sunday?
eec4b9c
to
7cbebd8
Compare
2cf7254
to
5b593ff
Compare
7cbebd8
to
f50d408
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## matan/consensus/m3/test_network_receiver #112 +/- ##
=========================================================================
Coverage 76.72% 76.72%
=========================================================================
Files 311 311
Lines 34345 34345
Branches 34345 34345
=========================================================================
Hits 26352 26352
+ Misses 5703 5702 -1
- Partials 2290 2291 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
Reviewable status: 0 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @asmaastarkware, @eitanm-starkware, and @ShahakShama)
a discussion (no related file):
Previously, ShahakShama wrote…
We plan to change those channels to Box<dyn Sink/Stream>, and then this PR will be unnecessary
@eitanm-starkware could you do that on Sunday?
As discussed your change is nothappening. Reviving.
5b593ff
to
0bfd2bb
Compare
f50d408
to
63a79b9
Compare
0bfd2bb
to
b138c57
Compare
63a79b9
to
4d7d319
Compare
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.
Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @eitanm-starkware and @ShahakShama)
b138c57
to
582a446
Compare
4d7d319
to
69f6412
Compare
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.
Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @eitanm-starkware)
582a446
to
d166e52
Compare
69f6412
to
240bd76
Compare
d166e52
to
f5bb03a
Compare
240bd76
to
e44b622
Compare
f5bb03a
to
cff4d46
Compare
e44b622
to
58392fa
Compare
Pull Request type
Please check the type of change your PR introduces:
What is the current behavior?
Issue Number: N/A
What is the new behavior?
Does this introduce a breaking change?
Other information
This change is