[v21.1.x] backport: release v21.1.0#6180
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…re no longer non-locked d8449ae fix: stop trying to sign pending txes when they are no longer non-locked (UdjinM6) Pull request description: ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented Masternodes keep trying to sign txes they received initially even after these txes were replaced by is/chain-locked txes later. ## What was done? Remove entries from `pendingRetryTxs` when txes are removed from `nonLockedTxs` set (as either already locked or as conflicted, doesn't matter). ## How Has This Been Tested? ## Breaking Changes ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_ ACKs for top commit: PastaPastaPasta: utACK d8449ae knst: utACK d8449ae Tree-SHA512: 45983faad6d590d4e44fc195c77d73d216e3d0bebef963fe556688773c82c07a118916f56fde7f1213df19d4fb9b7d82d8fd51abecd8e6c2108c27d62d0426c1
38ecd6f test: reduce BRRHeight on regtest (Odysseas Gabrielides) Pull request description: ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented In regtest, Block Reward Reallocation is buried at height 2500, which happens after v20 activation. ## What was done? Reduced BRRHeight in regtest from 2500 to 1000. The purpose of this change is to simplify regtests of Platform as well. Note: This change affects only regtest. ## How Has This Been Tested? tests ## Breaking Changes no, this only affects Regtest (where we make no guarantees about breaking stuff) ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_ Top commit has no ACKs. Tree-SHA512: b5a1c2b2c2b70682f266d9d0af9e048a03417c0cb2480eb5ab5838965342b6465acd10d8dac5a0d3c5c5f59f4e36ac5b909a838bc3805c2265a83776e92b4827
3783b70 chore: bump protocol version to 70233 (Odysseas Gabrielides) Pull request description: ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented ## What was done? Bumped protocol version to 70233 ## How Has This Been Tested? ## Breaking Changes ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_ ACKs for top commit: PastaPastaPasta: utACK 3783b70 knst: utACK 3783b70 Tree-SHA512: 3f5f04fcc31c5381a1ddce408a3c31876ca6d58ff229c80784ab938be70c3820b773c5db7f0c77fb7a00cc03dbefb70a42b81a0bf17195b78b47cee1e12310b5
6f82a56 feat: add option to AsyncSignIfMember to allow signing same requestID on different msgHashes (pasta) Pull request description: ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented Please see: https://www.dash.org/forum/index.php?threads/ehf-activation-issues.55146/ for a description of this issue ## What was done? Allow re-signing specifically for EHF messages, this is important as due to rotation, and duplicate requestIDs a member will refuse to re-sign when they participate in a later quorum. ## How Has This Been Tested? Devnet deployed with a mix of this version, older versions and current v21.0 ## Breaking Changes This doesn't introduce any breaking changes ## Checklist: _Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes that apply._ - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_ Top commit has no ACKs. Tree-SHA512: a758e6363901624d8540983ad09085d47a33fe61e8e576ec4317b051a0f988efb983bd06d9894bcce19c9f587ad703022ce00ceddd3760d7c9d382878f40c2d7
d32a03c chore: update man pages (Konstantin Akimov) Pull request description: ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented V21.1 preparation ## What was done? Update manpages ## How Has This Been Tested? n/a ## Breaking Changes n/a ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone ACKs for top commit: PastaPastaPasta: utACK d32a03c Tree-SHA512: a16036121c48597d80eefcf9232afb8f2da20d7b2e45de4beac31f025f3d8d638f5006e0bb52f706e08235fca172ddfc3309fd143734d37a14776cd7e8842128
PastaPastaPasta
force-pushed
the
pr-v21.1.0
branch
from
4f109d8 to
85c7dc5
Compare
knst
reviewed
Aug 7, 2024
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the file name is wrong, I believe
knst
reviewed
Aug 7, 2024
knst
previously approved these changes
Aug 7, 2024
Collaborator
knst
left a comment
knst
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
utACK 85c7dc5870701941797bdb4fcaaf55d0a35bfb93
consider fix 21.0.1 -> 21.0.2
PastaPastaPasta
force-pushed
the
pr-v21.1.0
branch
from
85c7dc5 to
4a23e6b
Compare
PastaPastaPasta
force-pushed
the
pr-v21.1.0
branch
from
4a23e6b to
8e9dd12
Compare
knst
approved these changes
Aug 7, 2024
UdjinM6
reviewed
Aug 7, 2024
Comment on lines
58
to
+61
| - Konstantin Akimov | ||
| - PastaPastaPasta | ||
| - UdjinM6 | ||
| - ogabrielides |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should be sorted and use proper names
Suggested change
| - Konstantin Akimov | |
| - PastaPastaPasta | |
| - UdjinM6 | |
| - ogabrielides | |
| - Konstantin Akimov | |
| - Odysseas Gabrielides | |
| - PastaPastaPasta | |
| - UdjinM6 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Backports for v21.1.0, add release notes and
What was done?
See commits
How Has This Been Tested?
Been on devnet
Breaking Changes
None
Checklist:
Go over all the following points, and put an
xin all the boxes that apply.