-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
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
feat(gov): add proposal types and spam votes #18532
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes involve a significant update to a blockchain application's governance module, introducing new proposal types, deprecating the Changes
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on X ? TipsChat with CodeRabbit Bot (
|
@@ -134,13 +157,15 @@ enum ProposalStatus { | |||
// TallyResult defines a standard tally for a governance proposal. | |||
message TallyResult { |
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.
todo investigate how to be minimally breaking for client if possible.
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.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 29
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files ignored due to filter (10)
- api/cosmos/nft/v1beta1/query_grpc.pb.go
- testutil/testdata/query.pb.go
- testutil/testdata/testdata.pb.go
- testutil/testdata/testpb/query_grpc.pb.go
- testutil/testdata/testpb/tx_grpc.pb.go
- testutil/testdata/tx.pb.go
- testutil/testdata/unknonwnproto.pb.go
- x/gov/types/v1/gov.pb.go
- x/gov/types/v1/tx.pb.go
- x/nft/query.pb.go
Files selected for processing (45)
- CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
- api/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.pulsar.go (37 hunks)
- api/cosmos/gov/v1/tx.pulsar.go (17 hunks)
- api/cosmos/nft/v1beta1/query.pulsar.go (10 hunks)
- proto/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.proto (3 hunks)
- proto/cosmos/gov/v1/tx.proto (1 hunks)
- tests/integration/gov/genesis_test.go (1 hunks)
- tests/integration/gov/keeper/grpc_query_test.go (2 hunks)
- tests/integration/gov/keeper/tally_test.go (16 hunks)
- testutil/testdata/testpb/query.pulsar.go (1 hunks)
- testutil/testdata/testpb/testdata.pulsar.go (1 hunks)
- testutil/testdata/testpb/tx.pulsar.go (1 hunks)
- testutil/testdata/testpb/unknonwnproto.pulsar.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
- x/gov/abci.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/abci_test.go (16 hunks)
- x/gov/client/cli/tx.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/client/cli/util.go (5 hunks)
- x/gov/client/cli/util_test.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/client/utils/utils.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/client/utils/utils_test.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/deposit_test.go (5 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/grpc_query_test.go (18 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/hooks_test.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/keeper_test.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/migrations.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/msg_server.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/msg_server_test.go (47 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/proposal.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/proposal_test.go (7 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/tally.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/tally_test.go (22 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/vote_test.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/migrations/v3/convert_test.go (4 hunks)
- x/gov/migrations/v6/store.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/migrations/v6/store_test.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/module.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/simulation/operations.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/simulation/operations_test.go (4 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/msgs.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/msgs_test.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/proposal.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/proposals_test.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/tally.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/vote.go (3 hunks)
Files not summarized due to errors (2)
- api/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.pulsar.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit
- api/cosmos/gov/v1/tx.pulsar.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (7)
- api/cosmos/nft/v1beta1/query.pulsar.go
- tests/integration/gov/keeper/tally_test.go
- testutil/testdata/testpb/query.pulsar.go
- testutil/testdata/testpb/testdata.pulsar.go
- testutil/testdata/testpb/tx.pulsar.go
- x/gov/keeper/msg_server_test.go
- x/gov/migrations/v6/store_test.go
Additional comments: 114
x/gov/module.go (2)
38-38: The consensus version has been correctly updated to reflect the new version of the governance module. This change is necessary for the migration function
Migrate5to6
to work properly.292-294: The addition of the
Migrate5to6
function is crucial for handling the transition from version 5 to 6 of the governance module. Ensure that the migration logic withinMigrate5to6
correctly handles all new fields and deprecated fields, such as the transition fromexpedited
toproposalType
.x/gov/keeper/migrations.go (2)
2-8:
The import section correctly includes the newv6
package for handling migrations from version 5 to 6.38-45:
The new migration functionMigrate5to6
is correctly implemented, calling theMigrateStore
function from thev6
package. Ensure that theMigrateStore
function is thoroughly tested to prevent data loss or corruption during the migration process.testutil/testdata/testpb/unknonwnproto.pulsar.go (1)
- 5-18:
The import ofcosmossdk.io/api/cosmos/tx/v1beta1
is new and should be verified for its usage within the file. The removal ofio
,math
,reflect
,sort
, andsync
suggests that their usage has been refactored or removed from the codebase. Verify that the removal of these imports does not affect any functionality and that the new import is indeed used in the code.tests/integration/gov/keeper/grpc_query_test.go (2)
60-66: The change correctly replaces the deprecated
expedited
boolean with the newProposalType
enumeration. This aligns with the pull request summary indicating that theexpedited
field is deprecated in favor ofproposalType
. Ensure that all other parts of the codebase that interact withSubmitProposal
are updated accordingly.183-189: Similar to the previous hunk, the
expedited
boolean is replaced withProposalType
. This is consistent with the changes described in the pull request summary. Verify that theSubmitProposal
function's signature has been updated everywhere it is called.x/gov/keeper/vote_test.go (1)
- 23-27: The
SubmitProposal
function call has been updated to include thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
argument. Ensure that all calls toSubmitProposal
across the codebase are updated to include the newproposalType
parameter.tests/integration/gov/genesis_test.go (1)
- 80-86: The
SubmitProposal
function calls have been updated to include the newv1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
argument. Ensure that all other parts of the codebase that callSubmitProposal
are updated accordingly to pass the correct proposal type.x/gov/keeper/keeper_test.go (2)
89-105: The test
TestIncrementProposalNumber
has been updated to use the newProposalType
enum values instead of boolean flags. This aligns with the changes in the governance module to support different proposal types. Ensure that all other relevant parts of the codebase are updated to use the new enum values.116-122: The test
TestProposalQueues
has been updated to use the newProposalType
enum values. It's important to verify that theInactiveProposalsQueue
andActiveProposalsQueue
logic correctly handles the new proposal types and that the migration of existing proposals to the new version is handled properly.x/gov/types/v1/msgs.go (1)
- 18-32: The
NewMsgSubmitProposal
function has been updated to replace theexpedited
parameter withproposalType
. Ensure that all invocations of this function are updated to use the new parameter. Additionally, verify that theProposalType
enumeration is properly defined and used throughout the codebase.proto/cosmos/gov/v1/tx.proto (1)
- 81-93: The
expedited
field is deprecated and replaced by theproposal_type
field. Ensure that all references to theexpedited
field in the codebase are updated to useproposal_type
. Additionally, verify that the default behavior whenproposal_type
is not set aligns with the intended logic, as it defaults toPROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
.CHANGELOG.md (1)
- 161-166:
The updates to the CHANGELOG.md accurately reflect the significant changes made to the Cosmos SDK codebase, including the removal and modification of functions and the shift in usage of certain types.x/gov/simulation/operations.go (1)
- 237-255: The
simulateMsgSubmitProposal
function has been updated to use the newproposalType
field instead of the deprecatedexpedited
field. This change aligns with the pull request's goal to introduce structured proposal types. However, ensure that all references to theexpedited
field are removed or replaced throughout the entire codebase to maintain consistency.x/gov/types/v1/proposals_test.go (2)
37-43: The test
TestNestedAnys
is correctly updated to use the newProposalType
enum. The use ofv1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
aligns with the changes described in the summary.58-77: The test
TestProposalGetMinDepositFromParams
is correctly updated to use the newProposalType
enum. The test cases are checking the minimum deposit based on the proposal type, which is consistent with the changes described in the summary.x/gov/keeper/hooks_test.go (2)
75-80: The test case has been updated to use the new
ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
instead of a boolean flag. Ensure that all references to the oldexpedited
flag are replaced with the newproposalType
field throughout the codebase.91-94: The test case correctly captures the proposal ID from the second submission to use in the
AddDeposit
call. This is a good practice as it ensures that the test is interacting with the correct proposal.x/gov/simulation/operations_test.go (4)
215-221: The
NewProposal
function is being called with theProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value, which is consistent with the change summary indicating the deprecation of theexpedited
boolean in favor of theproposalType
field. This change correctly reflects the new approach to handling proposal types in the governance module.258-264: Similar to the previous comment, the
NewProposal
function is correctly updated to use theProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value. This change is in line with the new proposal type handling mechanism.302-308: Once again, the
NewProposal
function is correctly updated to use theProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value. This is consistent with the changes described in the pull request summary.344-350: The
NewProposal
function is consistently using theProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value across all test cases, which aligns with the new proposal type handling mechanism described in the pull request summary.x/gov/keeper/msg_server.go (2)
84-94: The code correctly sets the
proposalType
based on themsg.Expedited
flag for backward compatibility. However, it's important to ensure that all other parts of the system that interact with proposals are updated to handle the newproposalType
field instead of the deprecatedexpedited
field. This includes updating any logic that previously relied on theexpedited
flag to now use theproposalType
enumeration.325-329: The
legacyMsgServer
struct'sSubmitProposal
method correctly sets theproposalType
tov1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
for legacy proposals. This change aligns with the deprecation of theexpedited
field and the introduction of theproposalType
field. Ensure that the rest of the system that interacts with legacy proposals is aware of this default setting and handles it correctly.x/gov/types/v1/proposal.go (2)
26-37: The
NewProposal
function has been updated to include theproposalType
parameter. Ensure that all calls to this function are updated to pass the new parameter. Also, verify that the defaulting logic toProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
whenproposalType
is unspecified is correctly handled in all scenarios.53-56: The
NewProposal
function sets the deprecatedExpedited
field based on theproposalType
. While this maintains backward compatibility, ensure that there is a clear deprecation path and that consumers of this field are aware of the change and migrate to usingProposalType
.x/gov/types/v1/msgs_test.go (1)
- 41-74: - The test cases in
TestMsgSubmitProposal_GetSignBytes
have been updated to include the newproposalType
field and remove the deprecatedexpedited
field. Ensure that all tests pass with the new field and that the expected sign bytes reflect the correct JSON structure with theproposalType
included.
- The
expSignBz
strings in the test cases need to be updated to include theproposalType
field in the expected JSON output.- The
NewMsgSubmitProposal
function call within the test cases correctly uses the newproposalType
field instead of the deprecatedexpedited
field.- The
fmt.Sprintf
usage in line 65 should be reviewed to ensure that it correctly formats the expected JSON string with the address placeholders.x/gov/client/cli/util_test.go (1)
- 223-226: The test case checks for the correct parsing of the
proposal_type
field from the JSON payload. However, the test case should also include a check to ensure that the deprecatedexpedited
field is either not present or correctly handled if it appears in the payload. This is to ensure backward compatibility and proper deprecation handling.x/gov/keeper/proposal.go (2)
19-30:
The function signature forSubmitProposal
has been updated correctly to include theproposalType
parameter. Ensure that all invocations of this function are updated to pass the correctproposalType
.92-95:
TheNewProposal
function is correctly called with theproposalType
parameter. Ensure that theNewProposal
function and related methods have been updated to handle this new parameter.x/gov/types/v1/tally.go (4)
31-40: The
NewTallyResult
function has been correctly updated to include the newSpamCount
field. Ensure that all parts of the code that call this function are updated to pass the newspam
parameter.46-49: The
NewTallyResultFromMap
function has been updated to handle the newOptionSpam
vote option. Verify that theresults
map is being correctly populated with theOptionSpam
key elsewhere in the code.55-55: The
EmptyTallyResult
function has been correctly updated to initialize theSpamCount
as zero using themath.ZeroInt()
function.59-64: The
Equals
method has been updated to include theSpamCount
field in the comparison. This is a necessary change to ensure that tally results are compared correctly with the new field.x/gov/migrations/v6/store.go (3)
3-8:
The import statements are correctly organized and necessary for the migration function.10-14:
The function comment is clear and explains the purpose of the migration.16-27:
The migration logic correctly handles the update ofProposalType
. Ensure that theExpedited
field is properly deprecated elsewhere in the codebase as per the pull request summary.x/gov/migrations/v3/convert_test.go (4)
130-136: The test case "invalid no count" is consistent with the pattern of setting an invalid value and expecting an error. The use of
tallyResult.SpamCount
is appropriate here as it is expected to be a valid value.140-146: The test case "invalid abstain count" follows the same pattern as the previous test cases, setting an invalid value for
AbstainCount
and expecting an error. TheSpamCount
is correctly taken from a validtallyResult
.150-156: The test case "invalid no with veto count" is set up correctly, with an invalid value for
NoWithVetoCount
and an expectation of an error. TheSpamCount
is correctly taken from a validtallyResult
.157-166: The test case "invalid spam count" correctly sets an invalid value for
SpamCount
and expects an error. This test case is important for ensuring that the newSpamCount
field is properly validated.x/gov/client/cli/tx.go (1)
- 141-141: The field
proposal.proposalType
in theNewMsgSubmitProposal
function call should be accessed with a capital 'P' if it is a public member of the struct (i.e.,ProposalType
). IfproposalType
is indeed the correct field name and is public, this is fine. However, ifproposalType
is private or if the field name is actuallyProposalType
, this will result in a compilation error.x/gov/types/v1/vote.go (3)
11-25:
The renaming and addition of constants for voting options are consistent and well-defined.107-127:
The backward compatibility inVoteOptionFromString
is handled correctly, ensuring that old string representations of vote options are mapped to the new constants.150-160:
TheValidVoteOption
function correctly validates the new voting options, including theOptionSpam
.x/gov/keeper/proposal_test.go (5)
20-39: The
TestGetSetProposal
function includes a TODO comment to remove it. Ensure that this is tracked in the project's task management system to avoid leaving TODOs in the code indefinitely.48-60: Similar to the previous comment, the
TestDeleteProposal
function also has a TODO comment to remove it. This should be tracked and addressed.110-127: The
TestDeleteProposalInVotingPeriod
function is testing the deletion of proposals in the voting period. It's important to ensure that the test cases cover all possible states of a proposal during the voting period, including before and after votes have been cast.158-187: The
TestSubmitProposal
function is testing various scenarios for submitting proposals. It's crucial to verify that all new proposal types are covered in the test cases and that the expected errors are correctly asserted. Additionally, consider adding a test case for submitting a proposal with an invalid proposal type to ensure that the system handles such cases gracefully.192-207: In the
TestCancelProposal
function, there are multiple proposals being submitted for testing cancellation. It's important to ensure that the test cases cover scenarios where proposals are in different states (e.g., voting not started, voting in progress, passed, rejected) to verify that cancellation behaves as expected in each case.x/gov/client/cli/util.go (4)
10-16:
Verify that no imports were removed that are still needed elsewhere in the code.87-98:
Ensure that theproposalType
field is used appropriately in the codebase and that its privacy level does not hinder its intended use.111-122:
The logic for parsing the proposal type and setting theproposalType
field is correct.180-193:
The logic to set theExpedited
andProposalType
fields based on theFlagExpedited
flag is correct, but ensure that theexpedited
field is indeed deprecated and replaced byProposalType
throughout the codebase.x/gov/keeper/tally_test.go (1)
- 379-400: The test case "quorum reached with spam > all other votes: prop fails/burn deposit" correctly tests the new spam vote logic. However, it's important to ensure that the
SpamCount
is being tested against the correct logic in theTally
function, i.e., that the proposal fails ifSpamCount
exceeds the sum of all other votes.proto/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.proto (6)
13-13:
Thego_package
option is correctly set to ensure generated Go code is placed in the appropriate package.16-28:
The newProposalType
enum is well-defined and provides a clear structure for different types of proposals.30-44:
TheVoteOption
enum is expanded correctly to include options for multiple choices and a spam option, aligning with the PR's goal to address spam votes.119-133:
The deprecation of theexpedited
field in favor of theproposal_type
field is consistent with the PR's description and follows best practices for evolving APIs.157-169:
TheTallyResult
message is updated to include aspam_count
field, which is necessary for the new spam vote tracking functionality.158-158:
Ensure that the migration path for clients is as smooth as possible, considering Julienrbrt's previous comment about minimizing breaking changes.x/gov/keeper/deposit_test.go (4)
24-38: The test cases for
TestDeposits
have been updated to use the newproposalType
field instead of the deprecatedexpedited
field. This aligns with the changes in the governance module to support multiple proposal types.47-61: The logic for determining the
depositMultiplier
based on the proposal type is correct. However, ensure that theDefaultMinExpeditedDepositTokensRatio
constant is properly defined and that the value is appropriate for expedited proposals.227-233: The
TestDepositAmount
function has been updated to use theproposalType
parameter when submitting a proposal. This change is consistent with the new governance module design.417-423: The
TestChargeDeposit
function correctly uses theproposalType
parameter when submitting a proposal. This is in line with the updates to the governance module.x/gov/client/utils/utils.go (1)
- 3-8: The import for
v1beta1
is still present but does not seem to be used anymore as references tov1beta1
have been replaced withv1
. Please verify if this import can be removed to clean up the code.- "cosmossdk.io/x/gov/types/v1beta1"
api/cosmos/gov/v1/tx.pulsar.go (10)
133-133: The field
fd_MsgSubmitProposal_expedited
is still present in the code. Since theexpedited
field is deprecated, ensure that it is no longer being used anywhere in the codebase.369-370: Returning the
ProposalType
as an enum is correct. Ensure that all corresponding enum values are properly defined and handled in the rest of the codebase.410-410: Casting the
value.Enum()
toProposalType
is correct. Ensure that theProposalType
enum is properly defined.454-454: The error message indicates that the
proposal_type
field is not mutable. This is consistent with the immutability of the proposal type after submission.587-588: The size calculation for
ProposalType
is correct. Ensure that theruntime.Sov
function correctly calculates the size of the variable-length field.619-622: The encoding for
ProposalType
is correct, following the protobuf encoding rules for varint.960-976: The unmarshalling logic for
ProposalType
is correct, but ensure that theProposalType
enum is properly defined and that all possible values are handled correctly elsewhere in the code.7090-7100: The deprecation comment for the
Expedited
field is clear and instructive. Ensure that all references to this field are removed or updated to useProposalType
.7165-7178: The getter methods for
Expedited
andProposalType
are correctly marked as deprecated and implemented, respectively. Ensure that the usage ofGetExpedited
is removed from the codebase.7974-8008: The proto file descriptor setup is correct. Ensure that all new types and fields are properly documented and that their usage is consistent across the codebase.
api/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.pulsar.go (5)
1215-1215: The
expedited
field descriptor is still present in thegov.pulsar.go
file. Since theexpedited
field is deprecated, ensure that it is no longer being used in the codebase and consider removing its descriptor if it's not needed.7452-7460: The
Expedited
field in theProposal
message is marked as deprecated. Ensure that all references to this field in the codebase are replaced with the newProposalType
field.8151-8158: The
expedited
field is still present in theProposal
message definition. Since this field is deprecated, ensure that it is no longer being used and consider removing it from the message definition if it's not needed.8254-8268: The
expedited_voting_period
andexpedited_min_deposit
fields are present in theParams
message. Since theexpedited
concept is deprecated, ensure that these fields are still required and update or remove them as necessary.8291-8293: The
ProposalType
enum still includesPROPOSAL_TYPE_EXPEDITED
. Since the expedited proposal type is deprecated, ensure that this enum value is no longer used and consider removing it if it's not needed.x/gov/abci_test.go (14)
30-36: The
NewProposal
function is being used with the deprecatedexpedited
field. Since theexpedited
field is deprecated in favor ofproposalType
, ensure that all instances ofNewProposal
have been updated to use the newproposalType
field.58-64: Similar to the previous comment, verify that the
NewProposal
function is updated to use theproposalType
field instead of the deprecatedexpedited
field.97-103: The
NewMsgSubmitProposal
function call correctly uses the newproposalType
field. Ensure that all other instances in the codebase are updated accordingly.142-148: This is another correct usage of the
proposalType
field in theNewMsgSubmitProposal
function call. Confirm that the rest of the codebase follows this pattern.165-171: Once again, the
proposalType
field is used correctly in theNewMsgSubmitProposal
function call. Verify consistency across the entire codebase.251-257: The
getDepositMultiplier
function is used to determine the deposit amount based on the proposal type. Ensure that this logic is consistent with the new proposal type handling and that the deposit amounts are correctly calculated for each proposal type.261-267: The
NewMsgSubmitProposal
function call is correct, using theproposalType
from the test case struct. Confirm that the test cases cover all possible proposal types and their expected behaviors.283-287: The test case correctly adjusts the
votingPeriod
based on theproposalType
. Ensure that the logic for expedited proposals is correctly implemented throughout the codebase.300-306: The test case checks for the conversion of an expedited proposal to a regular proposal after the voting period. Verify that the conversion logic is correctly implemented and that the test case accurately reflects the expected behavior.
320-333: The test cases are set up to handle different
proposalType
values. Ensure that the test cases cover all new proposal types introduced in the PR and that the expected outcomes are correctly asserted.337-343: The
getDepositMultiplier
function is used here as well. Verify that the logic for determining the deposit multiplier is correct and that it is consistently applied across all test cases.354-360: The
SubmitProposal
function call correctly uses theproposalType
from the test case struct. Confirm that the proposal submission logic is consistent with the new proposal types and that the test cases accurately test the expected outcomes.405-411: The
SubmitProposal
function call correctly uses theproposalType
field. Ensure that the proposal handling logic is updated to work with the new proposal types and that the test cases reflect the expected behavior.494-500: The
NewMsgSubmitProposal
function call is correct, using theProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_EXPEDITED
for expedited proposals. Verify that the handling of expedited proposals is consistent with the new logic introduced in the PR.x/gov/keeper/grpc_query_test.go (18)
58-64: The
SubmitProposal
function call has been updated to use the newProposalType
enumeration instead of the deprecatedexpedited
boolean flag. This change aligns with the pull request's goal to introduce structured proposal types.139-145: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestLegacyGRPCQueryProposal
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the legacy query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.155-161: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestLegacyGRPCQueryProposal
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration with thePROPOSAL_TYPE_EXPEDITED
value. This tests the expedited proposal type within the legacy query functionality.216-222: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestGRPCQueryProposals
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the proposals query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.415-421: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestLegacyGRPCQueryProposals
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the legacy proposals query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.496-502: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestGRPCQueryVote
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the vote query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.611-617: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestLegacyGRPCQueryVote
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the legacy vote query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.718-724: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestGRPCQueryVotes
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the votes query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.822-828: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestLegacyGRPCQueryVotes
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the legacy votes query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.1110-1116: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestGRPCQueryDeposit
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the deposit query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.1212-1218: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestLegacyGRPCQueryDeposit
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the legacy deposit query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.1303-1309: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestGRPCQueryDeposits
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration with thePROPOSAL_TYPE_EXPEDITED
value. This tests the expedited proposal type within the deposits query functionality.1400-1406: The
SubmitProposal
function call within theTestLegacyGRPCQueryDeposits
function has been correctly updated to use theProposalType
enumeration. This ensures that the legacy deposits query functionality is tested with the new proposal type structure.1502-1508: The
TallyResult
struct has been correctly updated to include the newSpamCount
field. This change is part of the pull request's goal to address spam votes in governance proposals.1519-1525: The
TallyResult
struct within theTestGRPCQueryTallyResult
function has been correctly updated to include the newSpamCount
field. This ensures that the tally result query functionality is tested with the new spam vote tracking feature.1546-1552: The
TallyResult
struct within theTestGRPCQueryTallyResult
function has been correctly updated to include the newSpamCount
field. This ensures that the tally result query functionality is tested with the new spam vote tracking feature for proposals in the deposit period.1573-1579: The
TallyResult
struct within theTestGRPCQueryTallyResult
function has been correctly updated to include the newSpamCount
field. This ensures that the tally result query functionality is tested with the new spam vote tracking feature for proposals in the voting period.1645-1651: The
TallyResult
struct within theTestLegacyGRPCQueryTallyResult
function has been correctly updated to include the newSpamCount
field. This ensures that the legacy tally result query functionality is tested with the new spam vote tracking feature.
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.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 7
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files ignored due to filter (1)
- x/gov/types/v1/gov.pb.go
Files selected for processing (7)
- api/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.pulsar.go (37 hunks)
- proto/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.proto (3 hunks)
- tests/integration/bank/app_test.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
- x/gov/README.md (8 hunks)
- x/gov/migrations/v6/store.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/vote.go (3 hunks)
Files not summarized due to errors (1)
- api/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.pulsar.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- x/gov/README.md
Additional comments: 13
tests/integration/bank/app_test.go (1)
- 386-390:
The update to usegovv1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
instead of a boolean value aligns with the newProposalType
enumeration. Ensure that all related test cases and code paths have been updated accordingly.x/gov/CHANGELOG.md (1)
- 27-44:
The changelog entries are clear and correctly link to the associated pull request. The deprecation of the
Expedited
field is correctly documented, consistent with the changes made in the pull request.x/gov/migrations/v6/store.go (1)
- 1-33:
The migration logic correctly updates the
ProposalType
based on the deprecatedExpedited
field. However, ensure that theExpedited
field is removed from theProposal
structure after the migration to avoid confusion and maintain clean code.x/gov/types/v1/vote.go (2)
13-25:
Verify that all parts of the codebase and any external systems interacting with these constants are updated to reflect the new definitions.139-148:
The changes to theValidVoteOption
function correctly reflect the addition of the new vote options.proto/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.proto (5)
16-28:
The addition ofProposalType
enum is correctly implemented to support different types of proposals.32-53:
The update toVoteOption
enum to include aliases and a newVOTE_OPTION_SPAM
is correctly implemented.129-143:
The deprecation of theexpedited
field in favor ofproposal_type
aligns with the PR's intent to introduce structured proposal types.167-179:
The addition ofspam_count
toTallyResult
is correctly implemented to track spam votes.168-168:
Consider providing a detailed migration guide for clients to handle the transition fromexpedited
toproposal_type
smoothly.api/cosmos/gov/v1/gov.pulsar.go (3)
7605-7610: The
GetProposalType
method correctly handles the zero value forProposalType
, which aligns with the changes in the pull request summary.8300-8309: The
ProposalType
enum is correctly defined with the new proposal types as described in the pull request summary.8310-8324: The
VoteOption
enum includes a newVOTE_OPTION_SPAM
as described in the pull request summary, which is used to track spam votes.
@@ -103,7 +109,7 @@ func (v WeightedVoteOptions) String() string { | |||
func VoteOptionFromString(str string) (VoteOption, error) { | |||
option, ok := VoteOption_value[str] | |||
if !ok { | |||
return OptionEmpty, fmt.Errorf("'%s' is not a valid vote option, available options: yes/no/no_with_veto/abstain", str) | |||
return OptionEmpty, fmt.Errorf("'%s' is not a valid vote option, available options: yes,option_one/no,option_three/no_with_veto,option_four/abstain,option_two/spam", str) |
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 error message should be updated to reflect the new vote options.
- return OptionEmpty, fmt.Errorf("'%s' is not a valid vote option, available options: yes,option_one/no,option_three/no_with_veto,option_four/abstain,option_two/spam", str)
+ return OptionEmpty, fmt.Errorf("'%s' is not a valid vote option, available options: option_one, option_two, option_three, option_four, spam", str)
Commitable suggestion
[!IMPORTANT]
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.
return OptionEmpty, fmt.Errorf("'%s' is not a valid vote option, available options: yes,option_one/no,option_three/no_with_veto,option_four/abstain,option_two/spam", str) | |
return OptionEmpty, fmt.Errorf("'%s' is not a valid vote option, available options: option_one, option_two, option_three, option_four, spam", str) |
@@ -1212,6 +1212,7 @@ var ( | |||
fd_Proposal_proposer protoreflect.FieldDescriptor | |||
fd_Proposal_expedited protoreflect.FieldDescriptor | |||
fd_Proposal_failed_reason protoreflect.FieldDescriptor | |||
fd_Proposal_proposal_type protoreflect.FieldDescriptor |
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 expedited
field is marked as deprecated in the pull request summary, but it is still present in the fd_Proposal_expedited
field descriptor. Please ensure that the deprecation is correctly reflected in the codebase.
if x.SpamCount != "" { | ||
value := protoreflect.ValueOfString(x.SpamCount) | ||
if !f(fd_TallyResult_spam_count, value) { | ||
return | ||
} | ||
} |
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 SpamCount
field in TallyResult
is being treated as a string, which is inconsistent with the summary stating that spam_count
is a new field to track spam votes. This should be an integer or a numeric type to properly count votes.
- SpamCount string `protobuf:"bytes,5,opt,name=spam_count,json=spamCount,proto3" json:"spam_count,omitempty"`
+ SpamCount int64 `protobuf:"varint,5,opt,name=spam_count,json=spamCount,proto3" json:"spam_count,omitempty"`
Commitable suggestion
[!IMPORTANT]
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.
if x.SpamCount != "" { | |
value := protoreflect.ValueOfString(x.SpamCount) | |
if !f(fd_TallyResult_spam_count, value) { | |
return | |
} | |
} |
0x12, 0x20, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x65, 0x78, 0x70, 0x65, 0x64, 0x69, 0x74, 0x65, 0x64, 0x18, 0x0e, 0x20, | ||
0x01, 0x28, 0x08, 0x42, 0x02, 0x18, 0x01, 0x52, 0x09, 0x65, 0x78, 0x70, 0x65, 0x64, 0x69, 0x74, | ||
0x65, 0x64, 0x12, 0x23, 0x0a, 0x0d, 0x66, 0x61, 0x69, 0x6c, 0x65, 0x64, 0x5f, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, | ||
0x73, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x0f, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0c, 0x66, 0x61, 0x69, 0x6c, 0x65, | ||
0x64, 0x52, 0x65, 0x61, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x40, 0x0a, 0x0d, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x6f, | ||
0x73, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x5f, 0x74, 0x79, 0x70, 0x65, 0x18, 0x10, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0e, 0x32, 0x1b, | ||
0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x73, 0x6d, 0x6f, 0x73, 0x2e, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x76, 0x2e, 0x76, 0x31, 0x2e, 0x50, | ||
0x72, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x73, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x54, 0x79, 0x70, 0x65, 0x52, 0x0c, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, | ||
0x70, 0x6f, 0x73, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x54, 0x79, 0x70, 0x65, 0x22, 0x86, 0x02, 0x0a, 0x0b, 0x54, 0x61, |
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 expedited
field is marked as deprecated in the pull request summary, but it is still present in the Proposal
message. Ensure that the deprecation is correctly reflected in the codebase and that the field is removed if it is no longer needed.
0x72, 0x75, 0x6d, 0x12, 0x41, 0x0a, 0x1d, 0x62, 0x75, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x5f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x70, | ||
0x6f, 0x73, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x5f, 0x64, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x73, 0x69, 0x74, 0x5f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x65, | ||
0x76, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x65, 0x18, 0x0e, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x08, 0x52, 0x1a, 0x62, 0x75, 0x72, 0x6e, | ||
0x50, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x73, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x44, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x73, 0x69, 0x74, 0x50, |
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 burn_proposal_deposit_pre_vote
field seems to be a boolean flag, but it is not clear from the field name what its purpose is. Consider adding a comment to explain its use or renaming it for clarity.
// Deprecated: Use ProposalType instead. | ||
// | ||
// Deprecated: Do not use. | ||
Expedited bool `protobuf:"varint,14,opt,name=expedited,proto3" json:"expedited,omitempty"` |
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 Expedited
field is marked as deprecated, but it is still present in the Proposal
message. Ensure that the deprecation is correctly reflected in the codebase and that the field is removed if it is no longer needed.
func (x *TallyResult) GetSpamCount() string { | ||
if x != nil { | ||
return x.SpamCount | ||
} | ||
return "" | ||
} |
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 GetSpamCount
method is returning a string, which is inconsistent with the summary stating that spam_count
is a new field to track spam votes. This should return an integer or a numeric type.
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.
Nice work and thank you @julienrbrt, just some drive-by comments.
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.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 3
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files ignored due to filter (1)
- proto/buf.yaml
Files selected for processing (3)
- x/gov/client/cli/util.go (5 hunks)
- x/gov/client/utils/utils.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/migrations/v6/store.go (1 hunks)
Additional comments: 5
x/gov/client/cli/util.go (4)
4-17:
The addition of the "strings" and "govv1" imports aligns with the usage in the updated functions. Ensure that the "v1beta1" import is still needed after the refactoring.50-59:
The logic to handle the case where the proposal file is not provided and to parse the proposal type from flags is correctly implemented.88-99:
The newproposal
struct is well-defined and includes the necessary fields to support the new proposal types.112-123:
The logic to parse the proposal type and messages from the proposal JSON is correctly implemented.x/gov/migrations/v6/store.go (1)
- 10-29:
The migration logic correctly updates the
ProposalType
based on the deprecatedExpedited
field, aligning with the changes described in the pull request summary. Ensure that all relevant documentation and client-side code are updated to reflect these changes.
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.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (1)
- CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
Additional comments: 1
CHANGELOG.md (1)
- 155-160: The changes documented in the CHANGELOG.md align with the PR objectives and the AI-generated summaries, confirming the removal of
WrapServiceResult
, the replacement of"cosmossdk.io/x/staking/types".Infraction_*
with"cosmossdk.io/api/cosmos/staking/v1beta1".Infraction_
, the change inNewContext
to no longer acceptcmtproto.Header{}
, and the modification inBurnCoins
to take an address instead of a module name. These updates are consistent with the intended enhancements to the governance module of the Cosmos SDK.
@coderabbitai pause |
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.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 2
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (7)
- x/gov/abci.go (5 hunks)
- x/gov/abci_test.go (17 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/deposit.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/msg_server.go (2 hunks)
- x/gov/migrations/v3/convert_test.go (4 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/msgs_test.go (1 hunks)
- x/gov/types/v1/proposals_test.go (2 hunks)
Additional comments: 32
x/gov/abci.go (5)
84-90: The logging changes reflect the updated proposal structure and are consistent with the PR objectives.
131-137: The logic to handle deposits for expedited proposals is correctly updated to use the new
ProposalType
field.199-211: The handling of failed expedited proposals, including the conversion to regular proposals and the extension of the voting period, aligns with the PR objectives.
247-253: The logging of the proposal tally results is updated to include the new
ProposalType
field, which is consistent with the PR objectives.318-324: The logging for a proposal that failed to decode is updated to include the new
ProposalType
field, which is consistent with the PR objectives.x/gov/abci_test.go (16)
30-36: The test function
TestUnregisteredProposal_InactiveProposalFails
has been updated to use thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value instead of a boolean flag for the proposal type. This change aligns with the PR objectives to introduce new proposal types and deprecate theexpedited
field.58-64: The test function
TestUnregisteredProposal_ActiveProposalFails
has also been updated to use thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value. The status of the proposal is explicitly set tov1.StatusVotingPeriod
, and the voting end time is set, which is necessary for the test logic.97-103: The test function
TestTickExpiredDepositPeriod
has been updated to include thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value in theNewMsgSubmitProposal
call. This change is consistent with the updates to the governance module.142-148: The test function
TestTickMultipleExpiredDepositPeriod
has been updated similarly toTestTickExpiredDepositPeriod
, using thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value in theNewMsgSubmitProposal
call.165-171: The test function
TestTickMultipleExpiredDepositPeriod
has another instance ofNewMsgSubmitProposal
being updated with thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value.205-211: The test function
TestTickPassedDepositPeriod
has been updated to include thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value in theNewMsgSubmitProposal
call.251-257: The setup for the
TestTickPassedVotingPeriod
test cases includes a call togetDepositMultiplier
to adjust the deposit amount based on the proposal type. This is a good practice as it reflects the different requirements for different proposal types.261-267: The
TestTickPassedVotingPeriod
test function correctly uses theproposalType
from the test case struct when creating a new proposal message.282-287: The
TestTickPassedVotingPeriod
test function includes logic to adjust the voting period based on the proposal type, which is consistent with the governance module's new functionality.300-306: The
TestTickPassedVotingPeriod
test function includes a check to ensure that expedited proposals are converted to regular proposals after the expedited voting period ends.311-315: The
TestTickPassedVotingPeriod
test function asserts that after the expedited voting period, the proposal type should not be expedited and the voting end time should be set correctly. This is a critical check to ensure the correct behavior of expedited proposals.337-343: The
TestProposalPassedEndblocker
test function setup includes a call togetDepositMultiplier
to adjust the deposit amount based on the proposal type, similar to theTestTickPassedVotingPeriod
test function.354-360: The
TestProposalPassedEndblocker
test function correctly submits a proposal with theproposalType
from the test case struct.405-411: The
TestEndBlockerProposalHandlerFailed
test function submits a proposal with thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
enum value, which is consistent with the changes to the governance module.494-500: The
TestExpeditedProposal_PassAndConversionToRegular
test function submits an expedited proposal using thev1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_EXPEDITED
enum value, which is consistent with the new proposal types introduced in the governance module.559-565: The
TestExpeditedProposal_PassAndConversionToRegular
test function includes checks to ensure that an expedited proposal is converted to a regular proposal after the expedited voting period, and that the voting end time is set correctly.x/gov/keeper/deposit.go (4)
281-287: The validation logic for the initial deposit checks if the deposit is valid and not negative, which is good practice for ensuring data integrity.
298-303: Verify that the
ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_EXPEDITED
case is still required in the switch statement, as the PR objective mentions deprecating theexpedited
field.
Verification result:
The
ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_EXPEDITED
case within the switch statement indeposit.go
is still valid and required. The usage ofProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_EXPEDITED
is found in multiple places within the codebase, including tests, message server logic, and migration scripts. This indicates that while theexpedited
field may be deprecated, the expedited proposal type is still recognized and handled in various parts of the governance module.
- 295-304: > Note: This review was outside the patches, so it was mapped to the patch with the greatest overlap. Original lines [304-309]
The calculation of
minDepositCoins
usingminInitialDepositRatio
is correctly placed after the switch statement to apply to all cases.
- 281-287: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [310-313]
The final validation check to ensure the
initialDeposit
meets the minimum requiredminDepositCoins
is correctly implemented.x/gov/keeper/msg_server.go (2)
76-95: The changes in the
SubmitProposal
function correctly handle the deprecation of theExpedited
field by introducing aproposalType
variable and using it in subsequent function calls. This aligns with the PR objectives and the generated summaries.326-332: The changes in the
SubmitProposal
function of thelegacyMsgServer
type correctly set legacy proposals to only be of standard type by usingv1.ProposalType_PROPOSAL_TYPE_STANDARD
. This aligns with the PR objectives and the generated summaries.x/gov/migrations/v3/convert_test.go (1)
- 130-136: > Note: This review was outside the patches, so it was mapped to the patch with the greatest overlap. Original lines [130-156]
The test cases for "invalid no count", "invalid abstain count", and "invalid no with veto count" are correctly setting invalid values for their respective fields and expecting an error, which is consistent with the test case's purpose.
x/gov/types/v1/msgs_test.go (1)
- 41-74: The changes in the test function
TestMsgSubmitProposal_GetSignBytes
correctly reflect the updates to theMsgSubmitProposal
structure, replacing theexpedited
boolean field with theproposalType
field of typev1.ProposalType
. The test cases have been updated accordingly, and the expected JSON strings in the test cases have been modified to include theproposal_type
attribute. This aligns with the PR objectives and the AI-generated summaries.x/gov/types/v1/proposals_test.go (3)
- 47-57: The
Expedited
field is still being referenced and used in tests, which is inconsistent with the PR objectives and the AI-generated summaries that mention the deprecation of theexpedited
field. This field should be removed or updated to align with the newproposal_type
field.- require.Equal(t, startExpedited, proposal.Expedited) - require.Equal(t, !startExpedited, proposal.Expedited)
40-40: The updated
NewProposal
function signature correctly takes aProposalType
argument, aligning with the PR objectives and the AI-generated summaries.40-40: The
ProposalType
enum is being used correctly in the tests to create proposals of different types, which is consistent with the PR objectives and the AI-generated summaries.Also applies to: 54-54
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.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 2
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (4)
- tests/integration/gov/keeper/grpc_query_test.go (4 hunks)
- x/gov/abci_test.go (19 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/deposit_test.go (6 hunks)
- x/gov/keeper/export_test.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- x/gov/abci_test.go
Additional comments: 4
tests/integration/gov/keeper/grpc_query_test.go (3)
15-17: The summary indicates that
TestGRPCQueryTally
has been removed, but the code showsTestLegacyGRPCQueryTally
is present. Please clarify if the summary is outdated or if the function was renamed rather than removed.33-34: The
expErrMsg
field in the test case structure is not used and could be removed to simplify the test code.
- 75-77: Consider adding more test cases to ensure comprehensive coverage of the new proposal types and spam votes functionality introduced in the PR.
x/gov/keeper/export_test.go (1)
- 11-17: The update to the
ValidateInitialDeposit
function signature to accept aproposalType
parameter is consistent with the PR's objective to handle different proposal types. Ensure that all calls to this function are updated to pass the correctproposalType
.
* feat: secp256k1 public key constant time (cosmos#18026) Signed-off-by: bizk <santiago.yanzon1999@gmail.com> * chore: Fixed changelog duplicated items (cosmos#18628) * adr: Un-Ordered Transaction Inclusion (cosmos#18553) Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aleksandr Bezobchuk <alexanderbez@users.noreply.github.com> * docs: lint ADR-070 (cosmos#18634) * fix(baseapp)!: postHandler should run regardless of result (cosmos#18627) * docs: fix typos in adr-007-specialization-groups.md (cosmos#18635) * chore: alphabetize labels (cosmos#18640) * docs(x/circuit): add note on ante handler (cosmos#18637) Co-authored-by: Aleksandr Bezobchuk <alexanderbez@users.noreply.github.com> * fix: telemetry metric label variable (cosmos#18643) * chore: typos fix (cosmos#18642) * refactor(store/v2): updates from integration (cosmos#18633) * build(deps): Bump actions/setup-go from 4 to 5 (cosmos#18647) Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: github-actions <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * feat(store/v2): snapshot manager (cosmos#18458) * chore(client/v2): fix typos in the README.md (cosmos#18657) * fix(baseapp): protocompat.go gogoproto.Merge does not work with custom types (cosmos#18654) Co-authored-by: unknown unknown <unknown@unknown> * chore: fix several minor typos (cosmos#18660) * chore(tools/confix/cmd): fix typo in view.go (cosmos#18659) * refactor(x/staking): check duplicate addresses in StakeAuthorization's params (cosmos#18655) * feat(accounts): use gogoproto API instead of protov2. (cosmos#18653) Co-authored-by: unknown unknown <unknown@unknown> Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(store/commitment/iavl): honor tree.Remove error firstly (cosmos#18651) * build(deps): Bump actions/stale from 8 to 9 (cosmos#18656) Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * chore(docs): fix typos & wording in docs (cosmos#18667) * chore: fix several typos. (cosmos#18666) * feat(telemetry): enable `statsd` and `dogstatsd` telemetry sinks (cosmos#18646) Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aleksandr Bezobchuk <alexanderbez@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: marbar3778 <marbar3778@yahoo.com> Co-authored-by: Marko <marko@baricevic.me> * feat(store/v2): add SetInitialVersion in SC (cosmos#18665) * feat(client/keys): support display discreetly for `keys add` (cosmos#18663) Co-authored-by: Julien Robert <julien@rbrt.fr> * ci: add misspell action (cosmos#18671) * chore: typos fix by misspell-fixer (cosmos#18683) Co-authored-by: github-merge-queue <github-merge-queue@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Julien Robert <julien@rbrt.fr> * chore: add v0.50.2 changelog to main (cosmos#18682) * build(deps): Bump github.com/jhump/protoreflect from 1.15.3 to 1.15.4 in /tests (cosmos#18678) Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * refactor(bank): remove .String() calls (cosmos#18175) Co-authored-by: Facundo <facundomedica@gmail.com> * ci: use codespell instead of misspell-fixer (cosmos#18686) Co-authored-by: Marko <marbar3778@yahoo.com> * feat(gov): add proposal types and spam votes (cosmos#18532) * feat(accounts): use account number as state prefix for account state (cosmos#18664) Co-authored-by: unknown unknown <unknown@unknown> * chore: typos fixes by cosmos-sdk bot (cosmos#18689) Co-authored-by: github-merge-queue <github-merge-queue@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Julien Robert <julien@rbrt.fr> Co-authored-by: marbar3778 <marbar3778@yahoo.com> * feat(client/keys): support display discreetly for keys mnemonic (cosmos#18688) * refactor: remove panic usage in keeper methods (cosmos#18636) * ci: rename pr name in misspell job (cosmos#18693) Co-authored-by: Marko <marko@baricevic.me> * build(deps): Bump github.com/pelletier/go-toml/v2 from 2.1.0 to 2.1.1 in /tools/confix (cosmos#18702) Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: github-actions <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * feat(client/keys): support display discreetly for keys export (cosmos#18684) * feat(x/gov): better gov genesis validation (cosmos#18707) --------- Signed-off-by: bizk <santiago.yanzon1999@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com> Co-authored-by: Carlos Santiago Yanzon <27785807+bizk@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: yihuang <huang@crypto.com> Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aleksandr Bezobchuk <alexanderbez@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Facundo Medica <14063057+facundomedica@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Akaonetwo <107335783+Akare123@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Marko <marbar3778@yahoo.com> Co-authored-by: Julien Robert <julien@rbrt.fr> Co-authored-by: dreamweaverxyz <153101746+dreamweaverxyz@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Pioua <136521243+dzizazda@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: github-actions <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: cool-developer <51834436+cool-develope@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: leonarddt05 <139609434+leonarddt05@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: testinginprod <98415576+testinginprod@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: unknown unknown <unknown@unknown> Co-authored-by: Sukey <35202440+sukey2008@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: axie <152680487+azukiboy@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Luke Ma <867273263@qq.com> Co-authored-by: Emmanuel T Odeke <emmanuel@orijtech.com> Co-authored-by: 0xn4de <109149873+0xn4de@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: hattizai <150505746+hattizai@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Devon Bear <itsdevbear@berachain.com> Co-authored-by: Marko <marko@baricevic.me> Co-authored-by: Halimao <1065621723@qq.com> Co-authored-by: Cosmos SDK <113218068+github-prbot@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: github-merge-queue <github-merge-queue@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Facundo <facundomedica@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Likhita Polavarapu <78951027+likhita-809@users.noreply.github.com>
Description
ref: https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/pull/18498/files
Prepares the groundwork for implementing optimistic proposal and multiple choice proposal
proposal.Expedited
when submitting a proposalSpam burns will be implemented in a follow-up to simplify the diff.
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...
!
to the type prefix if API or client breaking changeCHANGELOG.md
make lint
andmake test
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...
!
in the type prefix if API or client breaking change