Skip to content

Conversation

@brice-stacks
Copy link
Contributor

A new integration test:

  • Miner wins tenure N
  • Miner mines tenure change block and one additional block in tenure N
  • Block validation is paused so the next block proposal cannot be accepted yet
  • Miner proposes block M
  • Next burn block, N+1 arrives, with no block commits, so no sortition winner
  • Unpause block validation, block M is accepted
  • Miner mines tenure extend in block M+1

A new integration test:
- Miner wins tenure N
- Miner mines tenure change block and one additional block in tenure N
- Block validation is paused so the next block proposal cannot be accepted yet
- Miner proposes block M
- Next burn block, N+1 arrives, with no block commits, so no sortition winner
- Unpause block validation, block M is accepted
- Miner mines tenure extend in block M+1
@brice-stacks
Copy link
Contributor Author

Leaving this in draft until I add working variants of this test where:

  1. Block M is rejected by signers
  2. Block M doesn't reach consensus for either approval or rejection

Both testing additional scenarios with blocks mid-proposal while a new
burn block arrives with no winner.
@brice-stacks
Copy link
Contributor Author

These tests all pass -- no troublesome scenarios discovered.

@brice-stacks brice-stacks marked this pull request as ready for review December 18, 2025 18:42
aaronb-stacks
aaronb-stacks previously approved these changes Dec 18, 2025
hstove-stacks
hstove-stacks previously approved these changes Dec 29, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@hstove-stacks hstove-stacks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You have conflicts unfortunately, but LGTM!

@brice-stacks
Copy link
Contributor Author

I merged in develop and just had to fix a conflict in stacks-node/src/tests/signer/v0.rs, due to both branches adding new tests. @hstove-stacks @aaronb-stacks

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 30, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 1.63399% with 301 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 73.17%. Comparing base (6116402) to head (d78d9e8).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
stacks-node/src/tests/signer/v0.rs 0.00% 296 Missing ⚠️
stacks-signer/src/v0/tests.rs 44.44% 5 Missing ⚠️

❌ Your project check has failed because the head coverage (73.17%) is below the target coverage (80.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #6767      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    77.52%   73.17%   -4.36%     
===========================================
  Files          582      582              
  Lines       361565   361871     +306     
===========================================
- Hits        280294   264786   -15508     
- Misses       81271    97085   +15814     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
stacks-signer/src/v0/signer.rs 75.41% <100.00%> (-1.19%) ⬇️
stacks-signer/src/v0/tests.rs 83.48% <44.44%> (+3.48%) ⬆️
stacks-node/src/tests/signer/v0.rs 21.32% <0.00%> (+5.49%) ⬆️

... and 260 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6116402...d78d9e8. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

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.

3 participants