-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 217
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
Prevent staking to a retired pool. #1913
Prevent staking to a retired pool. #1913
Conversation
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
99db45a
to
b361989
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
b361989
to
cba0943
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
a214464
to
d8c9230
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.
Is there a reason that we track retired pools? I don't think we would need info about pools which can't be delegated to. Shouldn't we purge them from the database, and return "pool not found" in this case?
In function `prop_guardJoinQuit`.
8ba9e1e
to
fd3fe61
Compare
In response to review feedback: #1913 (comment)
For the record, we decided to return Fixed in 76b4ab1. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
1913: Prevent staking to a retired pool. r=jonathanknowles a=jonathanknowles # Issue Number #1853 # Overview This PR: - [x] Adjusts `joinStakePool` to return `ErrNoSuchPool` if the current epoch is _later than or equal to_ the retirement epoch of the specificied pool. # Comments Integration tests are **not** included in this PR, but will be tackled in a future PR. (See integration tests described in Issue #1853.) Co-authored-by: Jonathan Knowles <[email protected]>
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bors retry |
Build succeeded |
Issue Number
#1853
Overview
This PR:
joinStakePool
to returnErrNoSuchPool
if the current epoch is later than or equal to the retirement epoch of the specified pool.Comments
Integration tests specifically designed to test the rejection mechanism are not included in this PR, but will be tackled in a future PR. (See QA section of issue #1853.)
However, existing tests already verify that it is possible to stake to a non-retired pool, so we can be fairly confident we are not breaking existing functionality.