-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
feat(rpc): added optional block height in getassetunlockstatuses
#5849
feat(rpc): added optional block height in getassetunlockstatuses
#5849
Conversation
Guix Automation has failed due to the HEAD commit not being signed by an authorized core-team member. Please rebase and sign or push a new empty signed commit to allow Guix build to happen. |
a6d92bf
to
c597fb4
Compare
Guix Automation has began to build this PR tagged as v20.1.0-devpr5849.c597fb4d. A new comment will be made when the image is pushed. |
signed commit to get guix build |
Guix Automation has completed; a release should be present here: https://github.com/dashpay/dash-dev-branches/releases/tag/v20.1.0-devpr5849.c597fb4d. The image should be on dockerhub soon. |
getassetunlockstatuses
.getassetunlockstatuses
Guix Automation has failed due to the HEAD commit not being signed by an authorized core-team member. Please rebase and sign or push a new empty signed commit to allow Guix build to happen. |
Guix Automation has began to build this PR tagged as v20.1.0-devpr5849.d7408624. A new comment will be made when the image is pushed. |
Guix Automation has completed; a release should be present here: https://github.com/dashpay/dash-dev-branches/releases/tag/v20.1.0-devpr5849.d7408624. The image should be on dockerhub soon. |
Guix Automation has began to build this PR tagged as v20.1.0-devpr5849.7bfa0d7e. A new comment will be made when the image is pushed. |
Guix Automation has completed; a release should be present here: https://github.com/dashpay/dash-dev-branches/releases/tag/v20.1.0-devpr5849.7bfa0d7e. The image should be on dockerhub soon. |
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.
Some small suggestions on wording
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <[email protected]>
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.
utACK
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.
utACK
if you are going to push more changes - consider my nits
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.
re-utACK
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.
utACK
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.
utACK for squash merge
Issue being fixed or feature implemented
RPC
getassetunlockstatuses
is now accepting an extra optional parameterheight
.When a valid
height
is passed, then the RPC returns the status of AssetUnlock indexes up to this specific block. (Requested by Platform team)What was done?
Note that in order to avoid cases that can lead to deterministic result, when
height
is passed, then the onlychainlocked
andunknown
outcomes are possible.How Has This Been Tested?
feature_asset_locks.py
was updated.Breaking Changes
n/a
Checklist: