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

fix: unnest wasm samples from client, exclude it from workspace #4863

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 30, 2024

Conversation

nxsaken
Copy link
Contributor

@nxsaken nxsaken commented Jul 18, 2024

Description

  • move smartcontracts out of client/tests/integration
  • rename smartcontracts to wasm_samples
  • pin executor_custom_data_model version in client
  • exclude wasm_samples from the workspace
  • move default_executor to wasm_samples

Benefits

  • fixes the error with cargo install:

    package `.../client/tests/integration/smartcontracts/executor_custom_data_model/Cargo.toml` 
    is a member of the wrong workspace
  • wasm samples (executors, smartcontracts and triggers) are more discoverable

  • Dependabot updates target all wasm samples instead of just the default executor

Checklist

  • I've read CONTRIBUTING.md
  • I've used the standard signed-off commit format (or will squash just before merging)
  • All applicable CI checks pass (or I promised to make them pass later)
  • (optional) I've written unit tests for the code changes
  • I replied to all comments after code review, marking all implemented changes with thumbs up

mversic
mversic previously approved these changes Jul 23, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@mversic mversic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the change is ok

client/Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
DCNick3
DCNick3 previously approved these changes Jul 24, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@DCNick3 DCNick3 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think that our default executor is a terribly useful example, but having all crates that compile into on-chain wasm in one place does sound logical.

We might also want to make it more apparent which of the wasm examples are smart contracts, triggers or executors. Some naming conventions are trying to appear (executors are prefixed with _executor, triggers have _trigger somewhere in the name, smart contracts do not have those), but multisig and multisig_register kind of break this convention currently.

@nxsaken
Copy link
Contributor Author

nxsaken commented Jul 24, 2024

@DCNick3 I attempted it in the previous iteration of this PR: #4850. There I also unnested iroha_executor and iroha_trigger from iroha_smart_contract. I might revisit it after this.

@nxsaken nxsaken dismissed stale reviews from DCNick3 and mversic via 9600c8f July 25, 2024 05:22
@nxsaken nxsaken requested review from mversic and DCNick3 July 25, 2024 05:22
@nxsaken nxsaken enabled auto-merge (squash) July 26, 2024 07:39
DCNick3
DCNick3 previously approved these changes Jul 26, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added the config-changes Changes in configuration and start up of the Iroha label Jul 29, 2024
Copy link

@BAStos525

DCNick3
DCNick3 previously approved these changes Jul 29, 2024
Signed-off-by: Nurzhan Sakén <nurzhan.sakenov@gmail.com>
mversic
mversic previously approved these changes Jul 30, 2024
@nxsaken nxsaken dismissed stale reviews from mversic and DCNick3 via 28380a7 July 30, 2024 08:04
@nxsaken nxsaken requested review from DCNick3 and mversic July 30, 2024 08:04
@nxsaken nxsaken merged commit f92bbad into hyperledger:main Jul 30, 2024
11 of 12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
config-changes Changes in configuration and start up of the Iroha
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants