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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

chore: tm 0.34 changes #12221

Merged
merged 29 commits into from
Jul 5, 2022
Merged

chore: tm 0.34 changes #12221

merged 29 commits into from
Jul 5, 2022

Conversation

tac0turtle
Copy link
Member

Description

blocked on tm 0.34 release with priority

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • followed the guidelines for building modules
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • included comments for documenting Go code
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic
  • reviewed API design and naming
  • reviewed documentation is accurate
  • reviewed tests and test coverage
  • manually tested (if applicable)

@faddat
Copy link
Contributor

faddat commented Jun 11, 2022

Hey, I’m not really sure why we would do that. Is there a critical issue in tendermint?

@tac0turtle
Copy link
Member Author

tac0turtle commented Jun 11, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Hey, I’m not really sure why we would do that. Is there a critical issue in tendermint?

yes its unstable and there is a lack of confidence in the latest release. Happy to chat about it on tg.

We are working on getting features that are crucial to the ecosystem back ported, hope to have an update soonish

@faddat faddat mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2022
Closed
@webmaster128 webmaster128 mentioned this pull request Jun 22, 2022
Closed
github-advanced-security[bot]
github-advanced-security bot found potential problems Jun 28, 2022
View reviewed changes
server/tm_cmds.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
testutil/network/util.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
alexanderbez
alexanderbez reviewed Jul 4, 2022
View reviewed changes
x/upgrade/abci.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@alexanderbez
Copy link
Contributor

I reviewed every single file thus far -- looks good apart from params usage in a few places and a TM command comment.

alexanderbez
alexanderbez reviewed Jul 4, 2022
View reviewed changes
go.mod
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ require (
github.com/cosmos/cosmos-proto v1.0.0-alpha7
github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/db v1.0.0-beta.1
github.com/cosmos/go-bip39 v1.0.0
github.com/cosmos/iavl v0.18.0
github.com/cosmos/iavl v0.17.3
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We have to downgrade right? Isn't IAVL 0.18 what contains all the performance improvements @marbar3778?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

could use the osmosis v 0.17 ?

I think that the mainline 18 is osmo 17 with a few other changes iirc

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 does not. 0.18 has 0.35 tendermint which we need to remove

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

also I flubbed, the osmo fork, would require further changes and cause possible further sadness.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the C:Rosetta Issues and PR related to Rosetta label Jul 4, 2022
@alexanderbez alexanderbez marked this pull request as ready for review July 4, 2022 20:39
@alexanderbez alexanderbez requested a review from a team as a code owner July 4, 2022 20:39
@faddat
Copy link
Contributor

faddat commented Jul 5, 2022

Related

cosmos/ibc-go#1653

@julienrbrt
Copy link
Member

Can we add a changelog?

@alexanderbez alexanderbez merged commit e7bac31 into release/v0.46.x Jul 5, 2022
@alexanderbez alexanderbez deleted the marko/tm_034 branch July 5, 2022 13:40
@amaury1093 amaury1093 mentioned this pull request Jul 11, 2022
Merged
19 tasks
@julienrbrt julienrbrt mentioned this pull request Aug 18, 2022
Merged
19 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@faddat faddat faddat left review comments

@julienrbrt julienrbrt julienrbrt left review comments

@alexanderbez alexanderbez alexanderbez approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
C:CLI C:Rosetta Issues and PR related to Rosetta C:Simulations C:Store C:x/auth C:x/authz C:x/bank C:x/genutil genutil module issues C:x/gov C:x/group C:x/nft C:x/params C:x/staking Type: Build
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@tac0turtle @faddat @alexanderbez @julienrbrt