Thanks for posting this release @DRE-Team. I have a few questions about the proposal summary if that’s okay:
- Can I ask why 8e7a89e4 wasn’t referenced by the proposal summary (deprecating ECDSA-specific fields)
- Not all commits that have made changes to ‘rs/tests/src/orchestrator’, ‘rs/tests/src/tecdsa’, ‘rs/tests/src/consensus’ and ‘rs/tests/src/driver/’ files are included in this proposal summary. I’m guessing that lack of an entry in the CODEOWNERS lookup file for ‘rs/tests/src/driver/’ is the reason for one of these omissions (first point above). But I’m not sure about the others. Are you able to clarify?
- Interestingly, a change to the registry canister has been picked up as a relevant change and referenced in this proposal summary (but as far as I understand, it doesn’t actually modify GuestOS). Accepting this proposal wont actually deploy this change. Is it right to include this change in the proposal summary? (I suspect it’s due to the proposal summary tooling picking up on the change to the test file, but still)
- This proposal summary also references a commit which is then later reverted by another commit. Is there any chance of excluding (or marking) commits that have been reverted within the same proposal in future summaries (to avoid confusion)?
Thanks in advance. I always find your responses very helpful 