-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
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
polkadot v1.2.0 #207
polkadot v1.2.0 #207
Conversation
// Encointer customization: This part is different from upstream. We don't use the relay | ||
// consensus part from further below, we start with aura consensus directly. | ||
// | ||
// We do this because our launch-runtime comes with consensus, whereas the upstream | ||
// shell runtime does not have that. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can get rid of this legacy now. agree @clangenb ?
don't think it will ever happen again that we start with a shell which isn't launch-runtime
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The issue was different, there was extra code from upstream, which we didn't use, and so we removed it, but when I look at the code, it seems that we have harmonized it with upstream now anyhow. So we can remove it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me!
// Encointer customization: This part is different from upstream. We don't use the relay | ||
// consensus part from further below, we start with aura consensus directly. | ||
// | ||
// We do this because our launch-runtime comes with consensus, whereas the upstream | ||
// shell runtime does not have that. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The issue was different, there was extra code from upstream, which we didn't use, and so we removed it, but when I look at the code, it seems that we have harmonized it with upstream now anyhow. So we can remove it.
closes #206
list-communities
because of a semver violation, I had to
cargo update -p [email protected]
. see here