feat/parent-chain-phase-9-docs branched before 7b87a67 (#135) and has never been rebased. Merging it as it stands silently reverts the open-swap claim fix.
Verified by inspection of the branch:
|
main |
feat/parent-chain-phase-9-docs |
SwapAccept in TxData |
present |
absent |
swap_reservations database |
present |
absent |
validate_swap_claim_consensus payout rule for open swaps |
enforced |
skipped |
docs/SWAP_MECHANICS.html |
present |
absent |
docs/specs/L1_PAYMENT_PROOFS.html |
present |
absent |
It is also missing 0799cb6 (round RPC amounts to sats), 46b8275 (get_block_template/connect_block), and every dependency bump since.
Why this is easy to miss
The branch is 12 commits of genuinely good work — the parent-chain abstraction, the client trait, the health registry, the observer split — and it compiles and passes its own tests. Nothing about it looks like a revert. The regression only shows up if you diff the swap validators against main.
Ask
Rebase onto main before review, and re-run the swap integration tests afterwards — the SwapAccept flow the branch has never seen will need create_swap callers updated.
Related
Two documents live only on that branch and cannot be moved to main on their own, because they describe code that only exists there (the L1 registry, health states, --strict-l1-config, the Solana adapters):
docs/PARENT_CHAIN_ROADMAP.mddocs/OPERATIONS.md
They arrive when the branch does. Noted here so they are findable rather than rediscovered.
Also worth a decision at review time: the branch adds four parent chains nobody can prove anything about (Solana ×2, USDC ×2). docs/specs/L1_PAYMENT_PROOFS.html §7 recommends that unprovable chains leave ParentChainType. Shipping two security tiers under one name should be a deliberate call rather than a side effect.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01Mrg9zkV9bEdAvVEjx1RKLx
feat/parent-chain-phase-9-docsbranched before7b87a67(#135) and has never been rebased. Merging it as it stands silently reverts the open-swap claim fix.Verified by inspection of the branch:
mainfeat/parent-chain-phase-9-docsSwapAcceptinTxDataswap_reservationsdatabasevalidate_swap_claim_consensuspayout rule for open swapsdocs/SWAP_MECHANICS.htmldocs/specs/L1_PAYMENT_PROOFS.htmlIt is also missing
0799cb6(round RPC amounts to sats),46b8275(get_block_template/connect_block), and every dependency bump since.Why this is easy to miss
The branch is 12 commits of genuinely good work — the parent-chain abstraction, the client trait, the health registry, the observer split — and it compiles and passes its own tests. Nothing about it looks like a revert. The regression only shows up if you diff the swap validators against
main.Ask
Rebase onto
mainbefore review, and re-run the swap integration tests afterwards — theSwapAcceptflow the branch has never seen will needcreate_swapcallers updated.Related
Two documents live only on that branch and cannot be moved to
mainon their own, because they describe code that only exists there (the L1 registry, health states,--strict-l1-config, the Solana adapters):docs/PARENT_CHAIN_ROADMAP.mddocs/OPERATIONS.mdThey arrive when the branch does. Noted here so they are findable rather than rediscovered.
Also worth a decision at review time: the branch adds four parent chains nobody can prove anything about (Solana ×2, USDC ×2).
docs/specs/L1_PAYMENT_PROOFS.html§7 recommends that unprovable chains leaveParentChainType. Shipping two security tiers under one name should be a deliberate call rather than a side effect.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01Mrg9zkV9bEdAvVEjx1RKLx