Feat/sip034

[jcnelson]

This implements SIP-034. Thanks to @aaronb-stacks for getting the ball rolling on this!

Testing TODO:

• Transaction-processing unit tests to verify that new extensions only work in epoch 3.3 (and invalidate the block otherwise)
• Nakamoto chainstate unit tests to verify that new extensions will reset the various budget dimensions
• Nakamoto chainstate unit tests to verify that new extensions only work in epoch 3.3
• Signer unit tests to ensure that new tenure extension variants are rejected for the time being
• Integration test to verify that miners cannot produce blocks with new tenure extension variants for the time being

[aaronb-stacks]

This LGTM once the last integration tests are in place.

[jcnelson]

This is ready for review @aaronb-stacks @brice-stacks @jferrant @hstove

[jcnelson]

@jacinta-stacks @aaronb-stacks @brice-stacks Re-review plz 🙏

[brice-stacks]

👍

[djordon]

I was just casually looking through the PR and had a question.

[jcnelson]

Isn't this implementation equivalent to the one produced by the PartialEq derive macro? Hmmm, maybe the point is to explicitly not implement that trait? I'm curious, what is missing, incomplete, or a potential footgun if you were to implement this using the PartialEq trait?

Yes, it's equivalent and intentional. This PR deliberately removed `PartialEq` from `TenureChangeCause` in order to find and address all cases where we wanted to consider _any_ tenure extension, but had only compared a cause variable to `::Extended`. It removes a footgun.

[jcnelson]

Whoops, had a failing unit test. Please re-approve @jacinta-stacks @brice-stacks @aaronb-stacks 🙏

[jcnelson]

Okay, these integration tests are broken locally for me. Will try and find out why.

[brice-stacks]

Okay, these integration tests are broken locally for me. Will try and find out why.

disallow_reorg_within_first_proposal_burn_block_timing_secs_but_more_than_one_block_scenario is flaky on develop, even locally. Those other two usually pass locally.

[hstove-stacks]

This looks great! A few notes that are more on the nit side

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 10.29949% with 1228 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 28.69%. Comparing base (d622c3d) to head (8ec9bf9).
⚠️ Report is 30 commits behind head on develop.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...kslib/src/chainstate/nakamoto/coordinator/tests.rs	0.00%	447 Missing ⚠️
stacks-node/src/tests/signer/v0.rs	0.00%	217 Missing ⚠️
stackslib/src/core/mod.rs	0.00%	173 Missing ⚠️
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/db/transactions.rs	7.46%	62 Missing ⚠️
stackslib/src/chainstate/nakamoto/mod.rs	50.00%	43 Missing ⚠️
stackslib/src/net/tests/mod.rs	0.00%	35 Missing ⚠️
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/mod.rs	26.08%	34 Missing ⚠️
stacks-signer/src/chainstate/tests/v1.rs	0.00%	30 Missing ⚠️
stacks-signer/src/chainstate/tests/v2.rs	0.00%	29 Missing ⚠️
stackslib/src/core/test_util.rs	0.00%	25 Missing ⚠️
... and 16 more

❌ Your project status has failed because the head coverage (28.69%) is below the target coverage (80.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (d622c3d) and HEAD (8ec9bf9). Click for more details.

HEAD has 69 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (d622c3d)	HEAD (8ec9bf9)
	139	70

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           develop    #6609       +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage    79.86%   28.69%   -51.17%     
============================================
  Files          573      573               
  Lines       352853   354061     +1208     
============================================
- Hits        281798   101606   -180192     
- Misses       71055   252455   +181400     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
stacks-signer/src/chainstate/mod.rs	78.33% <100.00%> (-10.55%)	⬇️
stackslib/src/chainstate/nakamoto/shadow.rs	60.85% <100.00%> (-10.79%)	⬇️
stackslib/src/net/tests/inv/nakamoto.rs	0.00% <ø> (-95.95%)	⬇️
stacks-signer/src/tests/signer_state.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (-98.89%)	⬇️
stackslib/src/net/api/postblock_proposal.rs	53.93% <77.77%> (-11.72%)	⬇️
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/transaction.rs	7.33% <80.00%> (-88.56%)	⬇️
stackslib/src/clarity_vm/database/marf.rs	42.68% <33.33%> (-16.88%)	⬇️
stacks-common/src/types/mod.rs	69.14% <0.00%> (-12.13%)	⬇️
stackslib/src/chainstate/nakamoto/tests/node.rs	0.40% <0.00%> (-83.44%)	⬇️
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/index/marf.rs	62.40% <0.00%> (-20.53%)	⬇️
... and 19 more

... and 474 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 d622c3d...8ec9bf9. 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.