Add block provider to core-fellowship #6978
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This reverts commit cdd6c92.
…re-block-provider
This was referenced Dec 21, 2024
…re-block-provider
|
Sorry, only members of the organization paritytech members can run commands. |
gui1117
reviewed
Dec 26, 2024
cumulus/parachains/runtimes/collectives/collectives-westend/Cargo.toml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
cumulus/parachains/runtimes/collectives/collectives-westend/src/lib.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
gui1117
reviewed
Dec 26, 2024
|
EDIT: Okay should be good to re-review now 🙏 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Following #3617, core fellowship and related code is to be made async backing friendly. This PR adds the block number provider config parameter to pallet-core-fellowship.
In addition it
TODO:
Once Westend is updated I will write the migration for polkadot collectives.
Notes:
@xlc This will be my first migration and overall first PR with a bit more frame complexity, so please review carefully!
I've tested the migration for Westend using try-runtime. Unsure what the standard process is outside of that if any.
Also, the migration assumes consistent block times for westend and westend collectives, which is not the case, but I imagine this is not so much a concern and will largely be ameliorated when writing for polkadot collectives. Lastly, not confident in the runtime spec_version bump, that was a bit opaque to me, if you want to take a look.
@gupnik Tracking list