-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
Release v0.1.2 #847
Merged
Merged
Release v0.1.2 #847
+113
−4
Conversation
This file contains 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
* fix: createReservation lock * fix: additional locking places * fix: acquire lock * chore: feedback Co-authored-by: markspanbroek <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Adam Uhlíř <[email protected]> * feat: withLock template and fixed tests * fix: use proc for MockReservations constructor * chore: feedback Co-authored-by: Eric <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Adam Uhlíř <[email protected]> * chore: feedback implementation --------- Signed-off-by: Adam Uhlíř <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: markspanbroek <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Eric <[email protected]>
* fix storestream so it doesn\'t return parity bits for protected/verifiable manifests * use Cid.example instead of creating a mock manually
* fix verifiable manifest initialization * fix linearstrategy, use verifiableStrategy to select blocks for slots * check for both strategies in attribute inheritance test
Loading status checks…
* Fix verifiable manifest constructor * Add integration test for verifiable manifest download Add integration test for testing download of verifiable dataset after creating request for storage * add missing import * add testecbug to integration suite * Remove hardhat instance from integration test * change description, drop echo --------- Co-authored-by: Eric <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: gmega <[email protected]>
Loading status checks…
Signed-off-by: Slava <[email protected]>
veaceslavdoina
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 3, 2024
* fix: createReservation lock (#825) * fix: createReservation lock * fix: additional locking places * fix: acquire lock * chore: feedback Co-authored-by: markspanbroek <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Adam Uhlíř <[email protected]> * feat: withLock template and fixed tests * fix: use proc for MockReservations constructor * chore: feedback Co-authored-by: Eric <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Adam Uhlíř <[email protected]> * chore: feedback implementation --------- Signed-off-by: Adam Uhlíř <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: markspanbroek <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Eric <[email protected]> * Block deletion with ref count & repostore refactor (#631) * Fix StoreStream so it doesn't return parity bytes (#838) * fix storestream so it doesn\'t return parity bits for protected/verifiable manifests * use Cid.example instead of creating a mock manually * Fix verifiable manifest initialization (#839) * fix verifiable manifest initialization * fix linearstrategy, use verifiableStrategy to select blocks for slots * check for both strategies in attribute inheritance test * ci: add verify_circuit=true to the releases (#840) * provisional fix so EC errors do not crash the node on download (#841) * prevent node crashing with `not val.isNil` (#843) * bump nim-leopard to handle no parity data (#845) * Fix verifiable manifest constructor (#844) * Fix verifiable manifest constructor * Add integration test for verifiable manifest download Add integration test for testing download of verifiable dataset after creating request for storage * add missing import * add testecbug to integration suite * Remove hardhat instance from integration test * change description, drop echo --------- Co-authored-by: Eric <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: gmega <[email protected]> --------- Signed-off-by: Adam Uhlíř <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Slava <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Adam Uhlíř <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: markspanbroek <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Eric <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Tomasz Bekas <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Giuliano Mega <[email protected]>
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
PR to create a release v0.1.2.
It contains in diff changes which already were merged #842 on v0.1.1 release. Probably we should do a rebase on merging or maybe a cherry-pick?
GitHub pull request showing commits that are already in target branch
More real diff can be seen here (
... --> ..
) - https://github.com/codex-storage/nim-codex/compare/release/0.1..masterAnd more notes about that
master
and after PR is created, that can't be changed. And we can't accept that and this is why we should consider to use an intermediate branch for that -release-0.1.2-from-master
or something similar.