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

[WIP] Try out migration extraction #177

Closed
wants to merge 63 commits into from

Conversation

apopiak
Copy link
Collaborator

@apopiak apopiak commented Jul 6, 2020

This PR tries to extract migration logic out of substrate into separate crates.

Very prototypical, does not work, yet.

see paritytech/polkadot-sdk#353 for inspiration

drewstone and others added 25 commits May 14, 2020 15:53
…tructure parameters so that they could be modified through democracy. (#161)

Co-authored-by: remzrn <@>
…ies. (#165)

* Updates substrate commit, still broken, needs to resolve  compile errors

* Updates to new fork commit

* Updates

* Adds missing type from update

* Fix indentation

* Fixes indentation elsewhere
* add migration.md to track the process

* remove migration md (moved to issue #164)

* WIP add signaling hasher migration and (failing) test

* fix migration test

* add voting hasher change test and fix migration

* add WIP state grafting script

* actually execute migration for voting pallet

* use live chain for grafting and reformt code

* use apopiak-migrations substrate branch

* update grafting script to skip staking

* remove berlin.json loading line

* add mainnet-dev hybrid chainspec for migration testing

* update Cargo.lock

* add custom migration that orders balances and account migration correctly

* update cargo.lock
* Ups to apopiak's upstream merge branch

* Fixes module tests

* Changes branch to time-travel
…king

Prime member selection (ElectionsPhragmen) migration #11
* change substrate branch to corresponding branch for this one

* Updates lock file

Co-authored-by: Drew Stone <drewstone329@gmail.com>
@drewstone
Copy link
Collaborator

Maybe merge this into time-travel or is this intended to go directly to master?

@apopiak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

apopiak commented Jul 6, 2020

Maybe merge this into time-travel or is this intended to go directly to master?

of course, thanks, will tweak tomorrow

@apopiak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

apopiak commented Jul 6, 2020

wrong base branch

@apopiak apopiak closed this Jul 6, 2020
@apopiak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

apopiak commented Jul 8, 2020

See #179 for the actual PR

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants