Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore(ci): re-attempt fix #8

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Mar 4, 2024
Merged

chore(ci): re-attempt fix #8

merged 13 commits into from
Mar 4, 2024

Conversation

MaxMustermann2
Copy link
Contributor

@MaxMustermann2 MaxMustermann2 commented Mar 1, 2024

This is another attempt to fix all of the Github workflows for the develop branch. Since all of our PRs will merge to develop, the base branch must have its workflows passing successfully before our changes can have their code quality assessed.

Noteworthy changes:

  • I have disabled some of the parts or even full workflows which aren't applicable for our repository, since they were failing otherwise.
  • The dependency check (by Github) only fails if the vulnerability is rated at least high.
  • The patch version of 2 dependencies was upgraded.
  • All of the proto files have been linted and the go files re-generated.

@MaxMustermann2
Copy link
Contributor Author

The failing "Protobuf / break-check" workflow, in my opinion, should be ignored for this pull request because the changes are only cosmetic in nature (the Go code remains unchanged). However, do note that the JSON serialization of the objects will change because their JSON name has actually changed. Per my understanding, we do not use JSON serialization outside of the genesis file or the API or the CLI; so we should be good from a chain running perspective. The staking portal could need some changes.

"Consensus Warn / main (pull_request_target)" runs on the base (default?) branch and thus will not succeed until the DeliverTx code reaches that branch.

Copy link
Contributor

@TimmyExogenous TimmyExogenous left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@MaxMustermann2
Copy link
Contributor Author

If it is necessary to do so, the old JSON serialization can be retained with the json_name field. However, I would prefer to follow the recommended convention and make the changes within the consumers of the JSON API like the staking portal instead.

Copy link
Contributor

@mikebraver mikebraver left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@MaxMustermann2
Copy link
Contributor Author

Since the JSON API change will not be immediately deployed to our nodes, I will send a draft PR to the staking portal to account for it. The deployment will have to be coordinated amongst the two.

@MaxMustermann2 MaxMustermann2 merged commit a524619 into develop Mar 4, 2024
17 of 20 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants