-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.3k
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
Switch validator to eipv #2860
Switch validator to eipv #2860
Conversation
@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ | |||
--- | |||
eip: 196 | |||
title: Precompiled contracts for addition and scalar multiplication | |||
on the elliptic curve alt_bn128 | |||
title: Precompiled contracts for addition and scalar multiplication on the elliptic curve alt_bn128 | |||
author: Christian Reitwiessner<[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.
^^
@axic @MicahZoltu @gcolvin @Souptacular @nicksavers: thoughts on this PR? |
|
||
FILES="$(ls EIPS/*.md | egrep "eip-[0-9]+.md")" | ||
bundle exec eip_validator $FILES | ||
eipv EIPS/ --ignore=title_max_length,missing_discussions_to --skip=eip-20-token-standard.md |
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.
Please note that the validator is currently not ensuring that titles are less than the max specified length and that each EIP has a discussions-to
field. This is due to the number of non-conforming EIPs. I think formally increasing the max title length to support all current EIPs and then turning on the check is acceptable. With regards to the discussions-to
field, there are some options:
- In a separate PR, go in and create discussions threads for every EIP missing one
- Do 1) in this PR
- Forget historic EIPs with no
discussions-to
and only check new ones
I prefer 1
.
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.
I prefer 1 or 2. Anything that gets the system into a more standardized state so we can reliably use the bot going forward and don't need to maintain code to support malformed ancient EIPs.
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.
Also, prefer 1 or 2
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.
I'll follow the 1
path.
Hi! I'm a bot, and I wanted to automerge your PR, but couldn't because of the following issue(s):
|
@@ -4,7 +4,6 @@ title: EIP Purpose and Guidelines | |||
status: Active | |||
type: Meta | |||
author: Martin Becze <[email protected]>, Hudson Jameson <[email protected]>, and others | |||
https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-1.md |
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.
It's not clear what purpose this URL served here.
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.
I have changed this file locally just never submitted a PR. My understanding it tries to signal "look at the history".
What I opted for was "Martin ..., Hudson ..., et al."
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.
Oh I see, it was supposed to be a part of the authors field.
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.
Can we change the authors for EIP-1 to just "Contributors Like You". 🚎 /not-🚎
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.
I don't have a strong feeling towards this, but IMO it's outside the scope of this PR.
EIPS/eip-1485.md
Outdated
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ | |||
--- | |||
eip: 1485 | |||
title: TEthashV1 | |||
author: trustfarm (KT Ahn - 안씨아저씨) <[email protected]>, trustfarm <[email protected]> | |||
author: trustfarm KT Ahn - 안씨아저씨 <[email protected]>, trustfarm <[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.
I'm not sure if this is the best way to handle this. I'm not sure what the author was hoping to convey using the parentheses.
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.
I would probably talk to the author but my gut says to just remove the stuff in parenthesis. It seems like that email address is a company owned address, and the person on the other end of that address is subject to change. EIP Authors should not be subject to change IMO, so I think just trustfarm
is appropriate.
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.
Updated.
I approve the change in ERC-2470 date format. |
author: Paweł Bylica (@chfast) <[email protected]>, Jean M. Cyr (@jean-m-cyr) | ||
author: Paweł Bylica (@chfast), Jean M. Cyr (@jean-m-cyr) |
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.
I wonder if we should include the person twice in this case, so that they are a valid author both by email and by GitHub handle?
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.
(same comment elsewhere where this change was made)
Can you give us a snippet of what the errors look like? One of my biggest complaints about the validator is how cryptic some of its errors are. Would be nice to get the error messaging improved... |
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.
If it is as functional as the previous one, and has someone to support it (you) then I say we move forward with it and see how things go. If they go poorly, we can always rollback.
I don't have any strong negative feelings towards any of the EIP updates you have made here, though I did leave some comments.
cc @Souptacular to merge. :) |
f2e966b
to
c29ed4d
Compare
Here is what CI was spitting out at the beginning of the PR: https://travis-ci.org/github/ethereum/EIPs/jobs/715639437#L643-L686. The main goal was to minimize the number of runtime errors that the old validator was providing, which (by writing in Rust) I believe this validator has accomplished. The general form of errors is For a full list of supported errors, please see: https://github.com/lightclient/eipv/blob/0e84318896dfec2024206f8bab8a9625ba8a75e4/src/error.rs#L56-L102 |
c29ed4d
to
04d7976
Compare
Bumping, @axic, @Souptacular, @gcolvin -- any thoughts? Is this okay to merge? The longer we wait, the more conflicts that will pile up here. |
04d7976
to
45c06d4
Compare
Merged! Thank you for the hard work @lightclient. |
Woohoo! Thank you @Souptacular. |
* switch to eipv * fix * fix * 1153 remove trailing whitespace * remove file name checks * 615 remo whitespace before comma * 884 remove extra single-quotes * 1337 remove whitespace before comma * 1057 remove extra spaces after comma * 2470 update created date to Y/M/D format * 1078 update required eips to be in ascending order * 2477 update required eips to be in ascending order * 1271 remove extra whitespace * 2767 required eipupdated to be in ascending order * 2525 update created date to Y/M/D format * 2458 remove trailing whitespace * 1884 remove trailing whitespace * 712 authors should be on a single line * 601 remove extra whitespace * 1485 remove unneeded parentheses * 634 remove trailing whitespace * 2657 update discussions-to to correct spelling * 2009 remove trailing whitespace * 998 required eips updated to be in ascending order * 1186 remove trailing whitespace * 1470 remove extra whitespace * 1895 update created date to Y/M/D format * 2747 remove extra whitespace * 1613 remove leading whitespace * 1571 can'have both handle and email in author field * 1191 remove trailing whitespace * 1973 remove trailing whitespace * 196 don't wrap title field * 1679 required eips must be in ascending order * 1620 author can't have both handle and email * 197 don't line wrap title field * 2378 remove extra newline * 1355 author can't have both handle and email * 698 update created date to Y/M/D format * 2193 required eips must be in ascending order * 214 remove extra info after author email * use v0.0.3 of eipv * 1 remove malformed field * bump eipv to v0.0.4 * cache eipv build * 1485 remove extra author info * 2771 removing extra whitespaces
* switch to eipv * fix * fix * 1153 remove trailing whitespace * remove file name checks * 615 remo whitespace before comma * 884 remove extra single-quotes * 1337 remove whitespace before comma * 1057 remove extra spaces after comma * 2470 update created date to Y/M/D format * 1078 update required eips to be in ascending order * 2477 update required eips to be in ascending order * 1271 remove extra whitespace * 2767 required eipupdated to be in ascending order * 2525 update created date to Y/M/D format * 2458 remove trailing whitespace * 1884 remove trailing whitespace * 712 authors should be on a single line * 601 remove extra whitespace * 1485 remove unneeded parentheses * 634 remove trailing whitespace * 2657 update discussions-to to correct spelling * 2009 remove trailing whitespace * 998 required eips updated to be in ascending order * 1186 remove trailing whitespace * 1470 remove extra whitespace * 1895 update created date to Y/M/D format * 2747 remove extra whitespace * 1613 remove leading whitespace * 1571 can'have both handle and email in author field * 1191 remove trailing whitespace * 1973 remove trailing whitespace * 196 don't wrap title field * 1679 required eips must be in ascending order * 1620 author can't have both handle and email * 197 don't line wrap title field * 2378 remove extra newline * 1355 author can't have both handle and email * 698 update created date to Y/M/D format * 2193 required eips must be in ascending order * 214 remove extra info after author email * use v0.0.3 of eipv * 1 remove malformed field * bump eipv to v0.0.4 * cache eipv build * 1485 remove extra author info * 2771 removing extra whitespaces
As discussed in the EIPIP meetings, I've been working on a new validator called
eipv
. It isn't feature complete yet, but it should be comparable to the existing validator.