Daniel Bate
Daniel Bate
Deprecation will clean up `info` alot, this is the result for nextjs who have more published versions than us, but deprecate.
@arboleya I've investigated using a private registry and it certainly is possible. However one reason we use PR versions is for testing with consumers. Using a private/separate registry will require...
> Could we deprecate a specific tag when the related PR goes to master? Yes exactly my thoughts. So on a feature PR merge, we could deprecate any associated `pr`...
Makes sense. Given the increase in priority I've unassigned my self for now. Hopefully it can be picked up sooner by either @petertonysmith94 or @nedsalk?
This was closed by #2686.
I closed it as #2686 meant we no longer had to pass bytecode as config. Personally I like the explicitness of passing the object rather than object OR factory.
IMO there isn't a massive improvement from: ```ts contractConfigs: [{ factory: CallTestContractAbi__factory }] ``` to: ```ts contractConfigs: [ CallTestContractAbi__factory ] ``` Just seems like we are going to be type...
Do we still need this given #2579 and #2811 and our increase in test node usage across the repo? How come the test in #2756 was reverted?
Why do we need a separate issue for #2941. Would be not do #2941 as part of this issue? Prove #2941 through type level tests?
This could also be integrated via iframe like was proposed in #2984. Going to modify the issue description slightly.