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.

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(spec): Always start propose timeout #157

Closed
wants to merge 10 commits into from

Conversation

josef-widder
Copy link
Member

@josef-widder josef-widder commented Jan 15, 2024

This is the simple part for #81 to start timeoutPropose also at the Proposer.

The GetValue logic (adding consensus inputs and outputs and actions) will be done in another PR once #154, #156, and this PR are merged.


PR author checklist

@romac romac changed the title spec: always start proposetimeout fix(spec): Always start propose timeout Jan 15, 2024
@josef-widder josef-widder requested a review from romac January 16, 2024 09:52
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 16, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (e122983) 91.93% compared to head (8ac3caf) 91.93%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #157   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   91.93%   91.93%           
=======================================
  Files          33       33           
  Lines        1884     1884           
=======================================
  Hits         1732     1732           
  Misses        152      152           
Flag Coverage Δ
integration 90.01% <ø> (ø)
mbt 47.41% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@josef-widder josef-widder marked this pull request as ready for review January 16, 2024 09:53
@josef-widder
Copy link
Member Author

I close it as this will need to change again with the getValue logic.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants