docs: improve changelog for Inactive Provider Validators #2131
Conversation
WalkthroughWalkthroughThis update introduces important enhancements to the provider's validator management within the consensus mechanism. Key features include a new module parameter for capping the number of validators, options for allowing inactive validators, and a minimum stake requirement. These changes aim to improve flexibility and efficiency in validator selection while ensuring compatibility with consumer chains and adherence to operational guidelines. Changes
Possibly related issues
Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yml Files selected for processing (1)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
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? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (12)
.changelog/unreleased/features/provider/2079-inactive-validators.md (12)
1-1: Clarify the feature introduction.The introduction could be more explicit about what the feature entails.
- Add the _Inactive Provider Validators_ feature (as per + Introduce the _Inactive Provider Validators_ feature (as detailed in
3-3: Clarify the scope of changes.The description could be more explicit about the changes on the provider.
- which entails the following changes on the provider. + which includes the following changes to the provider module.
6-6: Clarify the parameter description.The description could be more explicit about the purpose of the parameter.
- Add `max_provider_consensus_validators`, a provider module param that sets + Introduce `max_provider_consensus_validators`, a parameter in the provider module that sets
7-7: Clarify the parameter purpose.The description could be more explicit about how the parameter affects the provider consensus engine.
- the maximum number of validators that will be passed to the provider consensus engine. + the maximum number of validators that the provider module will pass to the provider consensus engine.
8-8: Clarify the module introduction.The description could be more explicit about the purpose of the modules.
- Add `no_valupdates_genutil` and `no_valupdates_staking`, "wrapper" modules around + Introduce `no_valupdates_genutil` and `no_valupdates_staking`, which are "wrapper" modules around
9-9: Clarify the module functionality.The description could be more explicit about the functionality of the new modules.
- the Cosmos SDK's native genutil and staking modules. Both modules provide the exact + the Cosmos SDK's native genutil and staking modules. These wrapper modules provide the exact
10-10: Clarify the module functionality.The description could be more explicit about the functionality of the new modules.
- same functionality as the native modules, except returning validator set updates + same functionality as the native modules, except they return validator set updates
11-11: Clarify the module functionality.The description could be more explicit about the functionality of the new modules.
- to the provider consensus engine. + directly to the provider consensus engine.
12-12: Clarify the validator return process.The description could be more explicit about the process of returning validators.
- Return the first `max_provider_consensus_validators` validators (sorted by largest amount of stake first) + Return the first `max_provider_consensus_validators` validators (sorted by the largest amount of stake first)
13-13: Clarify the validator return process.The description could be more explicit about the process of returning validators.
- to the provider consensus engine. + to the provider consensus engine for further processing.
14-14: Clarify the use of themax_validatorsparameter.The description could be more explicit about how the parameter is used.
- Use the `max_validators` validators as basis for the validator sets sent to the consumers + Use the `max_validators` parameter as the basis for the validator sets sent to the consumers
15-15: Clarify the use of themax_validatorsparameter.The description could be more explicit about how the parameter is used.
- (`max_validators` is a staking module param). + (`max_validators` is a parameter in the staking module).
.changelog/unreleased/api-breaking/provider/2079-inactive-validators.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.changelog/unreleased/features/provider/2035-min-stake-max-rank.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
github-merge-queue
bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to no response for status checks
Description
Closes: #XXXX
Author Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.
I have...
docs:prefix in the PR titleReviewers Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.
I have...
docs:prefix in the PR titlemake build-docs)Summary by CodeRabbit
min_stakeconfiguration parameter for consumer chains to set minimum stake requirements for validators.allow_inactive_valsoption, providing flexibility in validator management by enabling inactive validators to participate in processes.