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

Change description of delayed_node option #1410

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 14, 2018

Conversation

HarukaMa
Copy link
Contributor

It seems that witness_node will populate all possible options to config.ini from all available nodes in new data dir, and the description of trusted-node for delayed node is a bit confusing.

It looks like:

# Will only store matched orders in last X seconds...
max-order-his-seconds-per-market = 2592000

# RPC endpoint of a trusted validating node (required)
# trusted-node =

# Block number after which to do a snapshot
# snapshot-at-block =

while it's not required for a normal node.

Maybe we should not merge this, instead prepend the name of plugin before corresponding options to clarify this (#1407).

Copy link
Contributor

@pmconrad pmconrad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks.
I think we should accept the change for now, until we have a better solution for #1407

@oxarbitrage
Copy link
Member

Please hold this merge, i am working in a solution for #1407 . Not very elegant but we can discuss it. Pull request for it coming in the next hours.

@HarukaMa
Copy link
Contributor Author

As #1411 would still take some time to come out, maybe this one should be merged first? I've seen another report of confusing comment in dev group just now...

Copy link
Member

@oxarbitrage oxarbitrage left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I agree, the final solution was a lot harder than expected and this at least will avoid some confusion.

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.

4 participants