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

Bump synedrion to v0.2.0 release #1186

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

ameba23
Copy link
Contributor

@ameba23 ameba23 commented Nov 27, 2024

This bumps synedrion from v0.2.0-beta.0 to the released v0.2.0. Dependabot would probably eventually do this for us, but im not sure when that will happen and i would like to have it in before we make another release.

There is one small breaking change in the release: KeyShare.verifying_key() now returns an Option<VerifyingKey>.

And keyshare format has changed so pre-generated keyshares need updating.

@ameba23 ameba23 added this to the v0.4.0 milestone Nov 27, 2024
@ameba23 ameba23 marked this pull request as draft November 27, 2024 14:15
@ameba23 ameba23 marked this pull request as ready for review November 28, 2024 11:32
@@ -148,6 +149,10 @@ async fn test_reshare() {
if new_signer_ids != old_signer_ids {
break;
}
if i > 100 {
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ameba23 ameba23 Nov 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is not relevant to this PR, but it was missing from #1185 - and i got a CI error in this PR which i think was caused by it: https://github.com/entropyxyz/entropy-core/actions/runs/12050178276/job/33598503963

I am pretty sure its not from a problem introduced by the new version of synedrion. (but you never know)

@@ -148,6 +149,10 @@ async fn test_reshare() {
if new_signer_ids != old_signer_ids {
break;
}
if i > 100 {
panic!("Timed out waiting for reshare protocol to finish successfully");
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

100 iters seem a bit random and it's not time based. If you want this to be a proper deadline, perhaps code it like

let start = std::time::Instant::now();
loop {
  // do things
  if start.elapsed() > std::time::Duration::from_secs(30) {
   // log, and bail
  }
}

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants