# Core Contracts Release 3 **URL:** \ **Category:** Governance\ **Created:** [January 29, 2021, 10:46pm UTC](https://forum.celo.org/t/core-contracts-release-3/755 "2021-01-29T22:46:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 7
**Author:** ![yorhodes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ed655f/32.png) [@yorhodes](https://forum.celo.org/u/yorhodes)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2021, 6:49pm UTC](https://forum.celo.org/t/core-contracts-release-3/755/7 "2021-02-05T18:49:40Z")
> [@thezviad](#): > > Imo, core contracts upgrades should be about code changes and functionality, and not about parameter changes. I tend to agree with this separation of concerns. In fact, I left similar [comments on the feature PR](https://github.com/celo-org/celo-monorepo/pull/6287#pullrequestreview-563094752). We just received the audit report for release 3 back from OpenZeppelin and they flagged the same **low severity** issue. Unfortunately the report is currently private, but below is the relevant excerpt: > The [`grace_period`](https://github.com/celo-org/celo-monorepo/blob/6b5143a142f4715a9b8bc428b1cf391eec414ec8/packages/protocol/contracts/governance/Validators.sol#L406) variable of the `calculateEpochScore` function in the `Validators` contract is hardcoded and it’s not possible to set it again to another value once the contract is deployed. > To improve flexibility and efficiency of the code base, consider implementing it in such a way that the governance can change its value without re-deploying the contract again. I recommend we use the audit response as an opportunity to make this parameter governable. --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.celo.org/t/core-contracts-release-3/755)._