Where communities thrive

Join over 1.5M+ people
Join over 100K+ communities
Free without limits
Create your own community

Explore more communities

CodeChain-io/codechain

Programmable multi-asset chain

People

Repo info

Activity

Jul 29 2020 01:16

Travis CodeChain-io/codechain-rpc-js (master) passed (38)
Jul 22 2020 07:07

Travis CodeChain-io/codechain-rpc-js#14 passed (37)
Jul 22 2020 07:07

Travis kseo/codechain-rpc-js (license) passed (1)
Mar 20 2020 06:28

MSNTCS opened #1962
Mar 20 2020 06:27

MSNTCS commented #1961
Mar 20 2020 06:25

MSNTCS closed #1961
Mar 19 2020 08:02

MSNTCS review_requested #1961
Mar 19 2020 08:02

MSNTCS opened #1961
Mar 03 2020 02:37

ScarletBlue edited #1948
Mar 03 2020 02:37

ScarletBlue edited #1931
Mar 02 2020 00:41

ScarletBlue edited #1915
Mar 02 2020 00:41

ScarletBlue edited #1915
Feb 27 2020 00:09

sgkim126 closed #1959
Feb 27 2020 00:09

sgkim126 on master

Bug fix in on_request_commit_me… (compare)
Feb 25 2020 09:41

majecty labeled #1960
Feb 25 2020 09:41

majecty opened #1960
Feb 17 2020 02:10

majecty commented #1959
Feb 14 2020 23:13

sgkim126 review_requested #1959
Feb 14 2020 23:13

sgkim126 review_requested #1959
Feb 14 2020 23:13

sgkim126 opened #1959

Park Juhyung

@majecty

@sgkim126 I'll remove shard related code from the Foundry while removing Assets.

Seulgi Kim

@sgkim126

@majecty I totally agree about cargo fix --edition-idioms. Please do it.

Kwang Yul Seo

@kseo

@sgkim126 it’s already done.CodeChain-io/foundry#10

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I removed all Asset and Shared related code in Foundry. I'm fixing clippy errors.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I'm removing Asset related e2e tests.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

@sgkim126 What do you think about adding a dummy transaction that uses shards? If we remove all asset-related transactions, there will be no transactions that use shard states.

I'm considering not to remove MintAsset instead of a new dummy transaction.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I'll add ShardStore transaction in Foundry. It's hard to keep shard structure after removing all shard transactions.

The "ShardStore" transaction saves arbitrary data in shards.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

@Remagpie FYI, a snapshot in Foundry must contain shard data.

Joonmo Yang

@Remagpie

Thanks. I almost forgot that. I added some commits to the PRs I sent.

Seulgi Kim

@sgkim126

@majecty I think we'd better implement shard module for testing including a dummy transaction.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

OK. I'm adding a simple transaction that uses shards. I'll request your Review today. Then I'll remove other shard transactions.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

Our check_shard_level_state macro is an excellent point to study Rust macro. I understood how to use the macro by reading it.

https://github.com/CodeChain-io/foundry/blob/master/state/src/impls/test_helper.rs#L558

Joonmo Yang

@Remagpie

Are we maintaining simple_poa consensus in foundry? I can't remember the usage of it.

Seulgi Kim

@sgkim126

The purpose was a testing network consensus without tendermint logic, but we don't use it for now.

Seulgi Kim

@sgkim126

I'll do CodeChain-io/foundry#21, CodeChain-io/foundry#14 would be better doing after snapshot refactoring.

Seulgi Kim

@sgkim126

Hi @majecty and @kseo, While I'm reviewing and writing commits, I found that the current coding style about importing order is easy to make a mistake. https://github.com/CodeChain-io/codechain/wiki/Coding-Style Currently, we split imports into 3 groups that are systems, other packages, and self modules, and sorting them in a group, but there are no formatting tools that group imports according to prefixes.

So we split the groups with a blank line, but we should take care of whether they are grouped as intended; it's easy to make a mistake.

I suggest to remove groups and make all imports ordered alphabetically. AFAIK, rust compilation doesn't affect by the importing order; therefore, it will not make a problem.

Kwang Yul Seo

@kseo

@sgkim126 sounds good to me. @majecty what’s your opinion?

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I'm happy to hear the suggestion. Let's do it!

Kwang Yul Seo

@kseo

@sgkim126 please file an issue first

Seulgi Kim

@sgkim126

I made two issues CodeChain-io/codechain#1940 and CodeChain-io/foundry#41

JinGyeong Jeong

@joojis

I think there is a point of pain when a new contributor is trying to patch RPC because of the e2e tests.

I think we should change our practice to use sendRpcRequest function in our e2e tests so that no SDK publish is required.

Kwang Yul Seo

@kseo

@sgkim126 would you review this PR again?
CodeChain-io/foundry#12

also this one
CodeChain-io/foundry#35

Seulgi Kim

@sgkim126

CodeChain-io/foundry#12 is waiting for CodeChain-io/foundry#11. I'll review CodeChain-io/foundry#35 now.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

FYI, it's 2020! Let's update copyright when we modify files.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

@sgkim126 I updated the CodeChain-io/foundry#12 PR.
Since the PR is created in the remagpie's branch, I cannot update PR.
Should I close the PR and re-create it?

Park Juhyung

@majecty

^ I sent a new PR CodeChain-io/foundry#120
It is funny that the new PR's number = 120 = 10 * the previous PR's number.

I'll import CodeChain's ICS implementation PR to Foundry.
CodeChain-io/codechain#1849

Park Juhyung

@majecty

^ Done.

The previous ics-poc was using the custom action handler. Since Seulgi will remove custom action soon, I'll migrate custom actions to normal transaction types.

Seongjae Choi

@cubismic

What is regular_key_owner? Is it just master_account that has the regular_key?

Park Juhyung

@majecty

@cubismic Yes, you're right. It is the master account.

Seongjae Choi

@cubismic

Thank you!

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I'm fixing this PR: CodeChain-io/foundry#120

Park Juhyung

@majecty

DONE.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I'm reviewing CodeChain-io/foundry#116

Park Juhyung

@majecty

@sgkim126 I reviewed your PR: CodeChain-io/foundry#116

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I'm reviewing https://github.com/CodeChain-io/foundry/pull/148/files

DONE

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I completed "Migrate IBC transactions to use TopLevel transaction" PR.

I'm checking ICS connection spec to check which functions I should implement.
https://github.com/cosmos/ics/tree/master/spec/ics-003-connection-semantics

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I misunderstood the role of the relayer in IBC.
I thought the relayer don't need to know the exact format of datagrams.
I found that the relayer should create diagrams by querying the state of chains.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

I've started implementing connection in IBC.

Park Juhyung

@majecty

While writing code of connection, I found that our ics-poc CommitmentPrefix is too generic. Maybe I'll fix it soon.

junha1

@junha1

I think most of ICS code should be concrete in ics-poc branch, since they're designed solely for Foundry as an opposite chain. Instead, interfaces that will be embedded in module should be generic.