-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 129
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
Upgrade CCV modules to SDK v0.47 #852
Comments
That SDK PR contains the changes that we think are needed to 47 for ics. I also think that instead of splitting go.mod, we should instead just add a v2 to the module path such as: module github.com/cosmos/interchain-security/v2 Then, v2 can consume v1 for test purposes, like testing 45 producer and 47 consumer scenarios. |
so, it is not possible to follow the steps you outlined here or on gaia without breaking main. Also, we are going to upgrade the whole repository. We feel that it doesn't make sense to do it partially. |
An experience we had from other repos (this is not about the Hub) is that feature branches could come in handy to help split large work in smaller PRs. We used a feature branch to capture a multi-month work related to ABCI 2.0, for example. The gist of using feature branches: Small PRs target the longer-lived feature branch, and the feature branch may intermittently fail to lint/make/CI. It's important to scope each PRs and review them as if it's landing on main with care. Eventually, you merge the whole feature branch into main when it's ready, and then it's still advised to do a sync review with 1-2 engineers. This is no silver bullet, and has some costs, but it has worked better than having big PRs. |
Thank you @adizere. @faddat We are currently updating the guidelines for working on large contributions #868. Constructive feedback from the community is greatly appreciated. |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This is the item that we most urgently need feedback on: the question is: does upgrading to sdk 47 require using a forked version of sdk 47? thanks |
@faddat I believe that this comment addresses your concern. |
@faddat Thank you for sharing your feedback. If you have concerns or you see any issues regarding Interchain Security, please open a new issue (if one is not already opened) and participate in thoughtful discussion on that issue. We'll try to address your concerns as soon as possible. Regarding the first point, you have received immediate feedback on both PRs you have opened on the SDK repo: cosmos/cosmos-sdk#15856 and cosmos/cosmos-sdk#15917. Regarding the second point, I need more context? That's the reason we are working with issues with a clear problem description where we can have thorough discussions. |
Problem
Currently, the entire ICS code requires SDK v0.45 and IBC v4 which will soon reach EoL.
We want to support SDK v47 and IBC v7 to allow upgrading provider chains and onboarding new consumer chains.
Closing criteria
AfterUnbondingInitiated
on provider side to support new cosmos-sdk behaviourCancelUnbond
operation on the provider (cosmos-sdk v47 related)Task list
Must have
AfterUnbondingInitiated
staking hook on ICS provider #945Nice to have
ibc_legacy_testing
from ICS #1008The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: