You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Revert the changes from #270 that start a node forc run. The issue with the current setup is that it will start a node with a persistent on-disk db, then not close it by default. Which then makes running a script multiple times (which always happens due to testing) not really produce desired results. It also makes it opaque how to then shut down the node gracefully later.
This should then be replaced by a long documentation blob if a node cannot be found at the given (or default) URL when running forc run and forc deploy.
We need to rethink exactly how, if it all, we want forc to start nodes. My suspicion is that any starting of nodes within forc will lead to more issues than not, and good errors are strictly better than opaque behavior with side effects.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Revert the changes from #270 that start a node
forc run
. The issue with the current setup is that it will start a node with a persistent on-disk db, then not close it by default. Which then makes running a script multiple times (which always happens due to testing) not really produce desired results. It also makes it opaque how to then shut down the node gracefully later.This should then be replaced by a long documentation blob if a node cannot be found at the given (or default) URL when running
forc run
andforc deploy
.We need to rethink exactly how, if it all, we want
forc
to start nodes. My suspicion is that any starting of nodes withinforc
will lead to more issues than not, and good errors are strictly better than opaque behavior with side effects.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: