Skip to content

Implement a hard fork for extended/infinite claim expiration times#112

Closed
lbrynaut wants to merge 1 commit intolbryio:masterfrom
lbrynaut:claim-expiration
Closed

Implement a hard fork for extended/infinite claim expiration times#112
lbrynaut wants to merge 1 commit intolbryio:masterfrom
lbrynaut:claim-expiration

Conversation

@lbrynaut
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@lbrynaut lbrynaut commented Apr 1, 2018

No description provided.

@kaykurokawa
Copy link
Copy Markdown

kaykurokawa commented Apr 2, 2018

Nice.

I think we first need to get a version of this that is not mainnet altering so that downstream LBRY devs can finally test expiration better using regtest and maybe testnet (they haven't been able to because of the long expiration time that was fixed and generating that many blocks take too long).

I made some alterations on this branch: https://github.com/lbryio/lbrycrd/commits/claim-expiration

This branch changes mainnet chainparams so that there should be no forking change in expiration on the mainnet
3539af2

I made it so that it claim expiration is not disabled by default, and utilized a #define statement, I made the if statement a bit easier to understand by using nCurrentHeight on CClaimTrie
c3646af

I was succesfully able to resync to the main-net with these changes. Let me know what you think.

@lbrynaut
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

lbrynaut commented Apr 2, 2018

@kaykurokawa Thanks for looking at this!

Explicitly disabling on mainnet is a fine idea so long as we're not looking to hard fork. The testnet/regtest params were already independent, so they could be tested at any reasonable heights. I agree picking an arbitrary mainnet fork height needs discussion, so for now, disabling is a fair option to move ahead with any testing required.

@kaykurokawa
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Closing this and continuing here: #115

@kaykurokawa kaykurokawa closed this Apr 4, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants