Skip to content
GitLab
    • GitLab: the DevOps platform
    • Explore GitLab
    • Install GitLab
    • How GitLab compares
    • Get started
    • GitLab docs
    • GitLab Learn
  • Pricing
  • Talk to an expert
  • /
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
    • Switch to GitLab Next
    Projects Groups Snippets
  • Sign up now
  • Login
  • Sign in / Register
  • Ercoin Ercoin
  • Project information
    • Project information
    • Activity
    • Labels
    • Members
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
  • Issues 1
    • Issues 1
    • List
    • Boards
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge requests 0
    • Merge requests 0
  • CI/CD
    • CI/CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
  • Deployments
    • Deployments
    • Environments
    • Releases
  • Packages and registries
    • Packages and registries
    • Container Registry
  • Monitor
    • Monitor
    • Incidents
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • Value stream
    • CI/CD
    • Repository
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • ErcoinErcoin
  • ErcoinErcoin
  • Merge requests
  • !1

Add proportional apportionment in validators’ draw

  • Review changes

  • Download
  • Email patches
  • Plain diff
Merged Krzysztof Jurewicz requested to merge KrzysiekJ/ercoin:apportionment into master Aug 10, 2017
  • Overview 1
  • Commits 1
  • Pipelines 0
  • Changes 3

Currently the Hare-Niemeyer method is chosen over Sainte-Laguë as presumably more efficient (generated lists are shorter), but it would be nice to verify this choice with either some theoretical analysis or some benchmarks.

Assignee
Assign to
Reviewers
Request review from
Time tracking
Source branch: apportionment