fudge icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
fudge copied to clipboard

Polkadot v1.1.0

Open mustermeiszer opened this issue 2 years ago • 11 comments

mustermeiszer avatar Nov 08 '23 13:11 mustermeiszer

Keeping this as a draft until we test it in the Centrifuge chain.

cdamian avatar Mar 19 '24 14:03 cdamian

I see we are using Moonbeam as a dependency, but only for testing. Do we really need it? It's very painful to work with. Could we get rid of it?

lemunozm avatar Mar 25 '24 15:03 lemunozm

@lemunozm Are you referring to any particular dependency or basically everything that comes from - https://github.com/moonbeam-foundation/moonbeam ?

Most of those things are used for XCM-related tests such as the pallet-xcm-transactor and I'm not sure if we wanna drop those just now.

cdamian avatar Mar 25 '24 16:03 cdamian

I meant everything coming from Moonbeam. Are we sure we wanna tie the fudge development to different versions of Moonbean just for testing? Could we not test xcm without using moonbeam?

~~By the way, doing a cargo test in the repo fails due the testing part and Moonbeam stuff is not migrated~~ EDIT: My fault, tests work well!

lemunozm avatar Mar 25 '24 16:03 lemunozm

@lemunozm I'm re-checking the tests now, it might be possible that I only checked the fudge-core and missed the rest, sorry about that, will fix asap.

As far as the tests go - I'm not sure if we want to drop the XCM tests, maybe @mustermeiszer can share his opinions on this one.

cdamian avatar Mar 25 '24 17:03 cdamian

Then, for having the XCM test, we are forced to be tied to the Moonbeam. Is there no other possibility?

lemunozm avatar Mar 25 '24 17:03 lemunozm

@lemunozm we really need pallet-xcm-transactor for those tests if we are to confirm that everything works correctly. Otherwise, we'll have to use something like we had before, that mocked the whole xcm setup.

cdamian avatar Mar 25 '24 17:03 cdamian

Otherwise, we'll have to use something like we had before, that mocked the whole xcm setup.

And that mock reduced the coverage of the fudge code?

lemunozm avatar Mar 25 '24 17:03 lemunozm

@lemunozm in a way, yes, since it wasn't using the actual XCM parts such as the downward message queue, XCMP queue and so on.

cdamian avatar Mar 25 '24 18:03 cdamian

Ok, I see...

lemunozm avatar Mar 26 '24 06:03 lemunozm

I think we can consider this ready, and can be merged. Anyways the branch MUST NOT BE REMOVED

lemunozm avatar Apr 02 '24 09:04 lemunozm

@cdamian do you want to hit the button? 🚀

We MUST keep the branch, do not remove it!!

lemunozm avatar Apr 26 '24 11:04 lemunozm

@lemunozm feel free to merge. ^^

mustermeiszer avatar Apr 29 '24 09:04 mustermeiszer

Do not remove the branch! 🙏🏻

lemunozm avatar May 07 '24 06:05 lemunozm