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

fix: Fix tests after qgb changes #133

Conversation

rach-id
Copy link
Member

@rach-id rach-id commented May 3, 2022

Attempts to fix the tests after the QGB related changed

@rach-id rach-id marked this pull request as draft May 3, 2022 16:41
@rach-id rach-id changed the title WIP Fix tests after qgb changes test Fix tests after qgb changes May 4, 2022
@rach-id rach-id changed the title test Fix tests after qgb changes fix: Fix tests after qgb changes May 5, 2022
Copy link
Member

@evan-forbes evan-forbes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

these changes make sense! we should probably document whatever our decision on which approach we're taking in terms of either using this approach or the SetOrchestrator approach, along with the factors that went into that decision

I would approve with a patch for the failing test (either we find the patch that we made before or change the existing test to expect to fail) and some documentation of what decision we want to make.

x/staking/client/testutil/suite.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@evan-forbes evan-forbes marked this pull request as ready for review May 5, 2022 13:55
@rach-id rach-id marked this pull request as draft May 5, 2022 13:58
@rach-id
Copy link
Member Author

rach-id commented May 5, 2022

some documentation of what decision we want to make.
I am planning to keep a separate celestia-qgb branch containing these changes for a period of time until we're 100% this is the right path, then we document it along with the QGB stuff.
What do you think ?

@evan-forbes
Copy link
Member

sounds good

Copy link
Member Author

@rach-id rach-id left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@evan-forbes if you're alright with PR, we can merge it.
No need to spend more time digging in history for the fix, I commented that test 😎

@@ -76,6 +76,11 @@ const (
// Tendermint logging flags
FlagLogLevel = "log_level"
FlagLogFormat = "log_format"

// QGB related flags
// FIXME: can we have these
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's alright to leave these here?
I checked also for the other flags, they are defined two times, here and under context also.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

they are defined two times, here and under context also

I would assume so. where are the second definitions?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@evan-forbes Let me know if this is alright so that I merge.
Thanks

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ahh I see, we actually probably want to remove those, as they are not global flags. Only the global flags for txs get loaded into that context. When we need access to those flags, we should access via parsing the flags in the definition of the cli command

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

will remove them from client/context then. Thanks

@@ -30,9 +31,6 @@ const (
FlagGenesisFormat = "genesis-format"
FlagNodeID = "node-id"
FlagIP = "ip"

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

now they are defined under general flags because they're also used in gentx, sim etc

@rach-id rach-id marked this pull request as ready for review May 5, 2022 17:24
@rach-id rach-id requested a review from evan-forbes May 5, 2022 17:24
@evan-forbes
Copy link
Member

ahh found it 434b308

we should add this before merging instead of commenting out imho, as it ensures that we don't forget about it. It probably won't matter, as we will likely upgrade soon, but out of good habit

@adlerjohn adlerjohn added bug Something isn't working C: QGB labels May 5, 2022
Copy link
Member

@evan-forbes evan-forbes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

pulling that commit to fix the failing test is kind of optional, but it wouldn't hurt.

approving with or without

@@ -76,6 +76,11 @@ const (
// Tendermint logging flags
FlagLogLevel = "log_level"
FlagLogFormat = "log_format"

// QGB related flags
// FIXME: can we have these
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

they are defined two times, here and under context also

I would assume so. where are the second definitions?

Copy link
Member

@adlerjohn adlerjohn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK

@rach-id rach-id merged commit f5d3545 into celestiaorg:rachid/orchestrator-address May 6, 2022
@rach-id rach-id deleted the fix_tests_after_qgb_changes branch May 6, 2022 15:42
rach-id added a commit to rach-id/cosmos-sdk that referenced this pull request May 9, 2022
…r struct (celestiaorg#133)

* first pass on tests fixes

* fixes the rest of unit tests

* remove unnecessary comments

* uses default eth address when starting sim network

* cosmetics

* comments failing test

* comments failing test

* uncomments test and fixes it from commit 434b308

* remove wrong testnet initialization
rach-id added a commit to rach-id/cosmos-sdk that referenced this pull request Jul 27, 2022
…r struct (celestiaorg#133)

* first pass on tests fixes

* fixes the rest of unit tests

* remove unnecessary comments

* uses default eth address when starting sim network

* cosmetics

* comments failing test

* comments failing test

* uncomments test and fixes it from commit 434b308

* remove wrong testnet initialization
rach-id added a commit to rach-id/cosmos-sdk that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2022
…r struct (celestiaorg#133)

* first pass on tests fixes

* fixes the rest of unit tests

* remove unnecessary comments

* uses default eth address when starting sim network

* cosmetics

* comments failing test

* comments failing test

* uncomments test and fixes it from commit 434b308

* remove wrong testnet initialization
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working C: QGB
Projects
No open projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants