-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 382
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: consider splitting consensus nodes into 2 pages again #1428
Comments
comment for the full consensus page:
|
based on your feedback, it sounds like this should still be 1 page? or is it better as 2? |
no, separate page, eg same like we have for Data Availability - light node or bridge node or full storage node here maybe we can have:
|
Hii 👋🏾 @jcstein can I work on this? |
yes please! to start, splitting back into two pages. and then, adding feedback from P-OPSOn Mar 8, 2024, at 12:45 PM, Levai Mackenzie Ágbàrà ***@***.***> wrote:
Hii 👋🏾 @jcstein can I work on this?
—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
@jcstein in this PR, should I also update the links in the docs that point to the old page, or should I make a new PR particularly for that? |
yep! let's do it all in this one. i'll work with you too and be reviewing it |
would revert #1107
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: