Skip to content
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

Update network-upgrade-process.md #1768

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Update network-upgrade-process.md #1768

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jcstein
Copy link
Member

@jcstein jcstein commented Oct 24, 2024

Temp hotfix for 2 weeks upgrade timeline

Overview

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Updated the Celestia network upgrade process document to reflect a new activation timeline, now set to two weeks after quorum signaling.
    • Clarified details regarding the upcoming Ginger network upgrade and its use of the new in-protocol signaling mechanism.
    • Maintained the overall structure while emphasizing coordination and implementation of network upgrades.

Temp hotfix for 2 weeks upgrade timeline
@jcstein jcstein requested review from rootulp and cmwaters October 24, 2024 13:38
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 24, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the document on the Celestia network upgrade process, specifically adjusting the activation timeline for upgrades from one week to two weeks following the signaling of 5/6 of the voting power. It clarifies that the upcoming Ginger network upgrade will be the first to use the new in-protocol signaling mechanism from CIP-10. The overall structure remains intact, detailing the upgrade process and referencing the Lemongrass upgrade as a significant prior event.

Changes

File Change Summary
how-to-guides/network-upgrade-process.md Updated activation timeline for upgrades to two weeks after quorum signaling; clarified Ginger upgrade details and its relation to CIP-10.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

documentation, enhancement

Suggested reviewers

  • rootulp
  • cmwaters

🐰 In the meadow, upgrades bloom,
Two weeks now, no sign of gloom.
Ginger's here, with signals bright,
Lemongrass paved the way, what a sight!
With each proposal, we hop along,
In Celestia's dance, we all belong! 🌼


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 24, 2024

PR Preview Action v1.4.8
Preview removed because the pull request was closed.
2024-10-24 17:13 UTC

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
how-to-guides/network-upgrade-process.md (1)

41-41: Consider adding more specific validator guidance

While the two-week timeline is clearly stated and consistent with the earlier section, consider adding practical guidance for validators about this extended timeline. For example:

  • When validators should ideally signal to ensure a smooth upgrade
  • How to monitor the signaling progress
  • What happens if the 5/6 threshold isn't met

Would you like me to help draft additional guidance text for validators?

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2519da2 and 26e56f7.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • how-to-guides/network-upgrade-process.md (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
how-to-guides/network-upgrade-process.md (2)

26-26: LGTM: Timeline update is clear and well-documented

The change from one week to two weeks for upgrade activation is clearly stated and properly contextualized within the in-protocol signaling mechanism section.


Line range hint 26-41: Verify impact on upgrade dates

The change from one week to two weeks may affect any planned upgrade dates mentioned elsewhere in the documentation.

✅ Verification successful

Let me try a different search strategy to find any potential timeline references.


Based on the search results, I can now provide a final response:

No timeline adjustments needed in other documentation files

The change from one week to two weeks for upgrade activation in the network-upgrade-process.md file does not require any adjustments to other documentation files. The search results show that:

  1. Other documentation files reference the network upgrade process page for specific details rather than duplicating the timeline information
  2. The only mentions of weeks in other files are unrelated to the upgrade activation period:
    • References to block sync duration (~3 weeks)
    • General scheduling information for meetups and events
    • Unrelated timeline references for other processes

The documentation maintains proper separation of concerns by centralizing the upgrade activation timeline details in the network-upgrade-process.md file and having other files link to it for the specifics.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for any mentions of specific dates or timelines in other documentation files
# that might need to be updated due to the timeline change

echo "Searching for potential timeline references that might need updates..."
rg -i --type md "upgrade.*\b(date|schedule|timeline|week)" --glob '!network-upgrade-process.md'

Length of output: 248


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for any mentions of upgrade timelines or dates using broader patterns
echo "Searching for upgrade-related content..."
rg -i --type md "(upgrade|timeline|schedule|activation)" -A 3 -B 3 --glob '!network-upgrade-process.md'

# Also check specifically for any numerical references to weeks
echo -e "\nSearching for week-related mentions..."
rg -i --type md "\b\d+\s*(week|wk)" --glob '!network-upgrade-process.md'

Length of output: 31996

@jcstein jcstein closed this Oct 24, 2024
@jcstein jcstein deleted the jcstein-patch-1 branch October 24, 2024 17:13
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.

1 participant