Skip to content

Conversation

glyh
Copy link
Member

@glyh glyh commented Sep 30, 2025

A simple noop PR pushing sig kind out of txn witness.

It's previously suggested by @georgeee we should store txn kind in proof cache db. But it seems they're not actually attached to proofs stored in proof cache DB. hence I'm leaning toward pushing upward, and here is this PR.

@glyh glyh requested a review from a team as a code owner September 30, 2025 05:11
Copy link
Member

@cjjdespres cjjdespres left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The code doesn't end up being too messy after all, if we keep pushing the signature kind upward? It would make sense to store the signature kind in the proof db if we needed to, because the signature kind is used as an input to the proofs through the hashes. So the proofs are all valid relative to a single signature kind.

But if we don't need to store it there then that's also fine.

@cjjdespres
Copy link
Member

!ci-bypass-changelog

@cjjdespres
Copy link
Member

!ci-build-me

@glyh
Copy link
Member Author

glyh commented Sep 30, 2025

because the signature kind is used as an input to the proofs through the hashes.

Indeed. The problem is that it seems it's still not strictly attached to a DB, nothing's preventing us to write proof of wrong sig kind into the DB. So I think it's probably better to keep it otherwise.

I'm fine if you feel like we should do it otherwise.

@glyh
Copy link
Member Author

glyh commented Sep 30, 2025

Okay, I'll prepare a PR against develop for a clean merge

@cjjdespres
Copy link
Member

I think this might have been covered by some of George's recent PRs?

@cjjdespres cjjdespres closed this Oct 17, 2025
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.

2 participants