Ethereum Core Devs Meeting 50 Agenda
lrettig opened this issue · 8 comments
lrettig commented
Ethereum Core Devs Meeting 50 Agenda
Meeting Date/Time: Friday 23 November 2018 at 14:00 UTC
Meeting Duration 1.5 hours
YouTube Live Stream Link
Livepeer Stream Link
Constantinople Progress
Agenda
- Document being mentioned on Coindesk.
- Testing
- Client Updates
- Research Updates
- Constantinople/Ropsten HF, hardfork timing
- ProgPoW Update
5chdn commented
Constantinople
- Just putting down an updated block number for discussion:
7090939(January 16, 2019, 12pm UTC @ 14 sec block time)7068475(January 16, 2019, 12pm UTC @ 15 sec block time)
- According to the Constantinople Tracker, all clients are ready now 🎉
Stureby PoW-Testnet
- Scope: Redo the Constantinople hard-fork transition
- Genesis/Chainspec: https://gist.github.com/5chdn/baf0eb40cbaff5a90befc52815d6950b
- Dashboard http://boot.stureby.ethdevops.io/
- TODO: pool(s), fork monitor
Görli PoA-Testnet
- Now supported by four clients (Geth, Parity*, Pantheon, Nethermind) https://stats.goerli.net/
- We could discuss a potential deprecation and replacement of Ropsten after Constantinople next year
lrettig commented
Just putting down an updated block number for discussion: ~ 7078690 (January 16, 2019, 12pm UTC)
Since this has come up a few times recently, here's the conversation we had in AllCoreDevs a few weeks ago about forking on timestamp instead of block number. My understanding of the reasons against doing so:
- Block number is simpler and harder for miners to game. "eth hashrate base is big enough you can't accelerate the fork by anything statistically significant."
- We could have a situation where an uncle block has a newer timestamp and therefore different fork rules than the canonical head
- "All current tools for configuration uses block numbers (test generators, hive configuration, evmlab randomtest generator). All tests would need regeneration, and fork configuration params and logic in clients would need rewriting" (@holiman)
What have I missed?
Is there any value in continuing this debate or are we satisfied that block number is the only option?
kylerchin commented
The biggest thing I'm watching is the fork date and block numbers. If we
can get that established, and maybe a bit on sharding progress, then my
needs are met. See everyone on Friday morning! 😋
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018, 5:24 AM Lane Rettig ***@***.***> wrote:
Just putting down an updated block number for discussion: ~ 7078690
(January 16, 2019, 12pm UTC)
Since this has come up a few times recently, here's the conversation we
had in AllCoreDevs
<https://gitter.im/ethereum/AllCoreDevs?at=5bca0f35c08b8b30673d9864> a
few weeks ago about forking on timestamp instead of block number. My
understanding of the reasons against doing so:
- Block number is simpler and harder for miners to game. "eth hashrate
base is big enough you can't accelerate the fork by anything statistically
significant."
- We could have a situation where an uncle block has a newer timestamp
and therefore different fork rules than the canonical head
- "All current tools for configuration uses block numbers (test
generators, hive configuration, evmlab randomtest generator). All tests
would need regeneration, and fork configuration params and logic in clients
would need rewriting" ***@***.*** <https://github.com/holiman>)
What have I missed?
Is there any value in continuing this debate or are we satisfied that
block number is the only option?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#62 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHMJ5huvdLusZ5TeBk9kxsj3mbAeTVVrks5uvBl8gaJpZM4YXWaY>
.
--
From Kyler Chin
salanki commented
ProgPoW update please
gcolvin commented
holiman commented
I won't make the call today. Some updates:
- Two evm fuzzers are (still) running. No new issues found in the last couple of weeks.
- One testcase found by fuzzing has now been added to the tests-repo. It affected geth and ethereumJ (at least), and concerned
EXTCODEHASHin a fairly complex edgcase scenario. - Hive is currently down for maintenance, I have some hopes that we'll get it working again during the day. Hive has been moved into the ethereum org (https://github.com/ethereum/hive/), and a new geth-team member @FrankSzendzielarz have been working on improving it further, with a test-suite for p2p networking as well as support for more advanced multi-cllient test suites.
5chdn commented
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IB3oKuH5mryyhmVHE9r3aR6bK2pJCoJgAtiCYTEieh4/edit?usp=sharing
where was this and how to get into these meetings?
June 1, 2019: target for hardfork
what is this about?