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

feat: Add the instantiate_permission in the CodeInfoResponse #395

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 14, 2021

Conversation

zemyblue
Copy link
Member

Description

When deploy a contract, instantiate_permission info is added. But There is not an api for querying instantiate_permission of codeID. Becase CodeInfoResponse didn't have instantiate_permission property.


Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.

  • Targeted PR against correct branch (see CONTRIBUTING.md)
  • Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work. (Nothing)
  • Code follows the module structure standards.
  • Wrote unit and integration tests
  • Updated relevant documentation (docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/)
  • Added relevant godoc comments.
  • Added a relevant changelog entry to the Unreleased section in CHANGELOG.md
  • Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer
  • Review Codecov Report in the comment section below once CI passes

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 10, 2021

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (main@a58c60d). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #395   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   53.86%           
=======================================
  Files           ?      674           
  Lines           ?    69663           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?    37527           
  Misses          ?    29127           
  Partials        ?     3009           

Copy link
Contributor

@shiki-tak shiki-tak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@zemyblue zemyblue merged commit 3913cf0 into main Dec 14, 2021
@zemyblue zemyblue deleted the zemyblue/wasm_query_code branch December 14, 2021 00:48
zemyblue added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 25, 2022
* main: (44 commits)
  feat: rewrite issue template and move PR template (#410)
  fix: validate validator addresses in update-validator-auths proposal (#411)
  feat: add `bankplus` function to restrict to send coin to inactive smart contract. (#400)
  build(deps): bump actions/setup-go from 2.1.4 to 2.1.5 (#408)
  ci: fix branch name on ci script (#409)
  feat: Add CreateValidator access control feature (#406)
  build(deps): bump github.com/spf13/viper from 1.9.0 to 1.10.1 (#403)
  build(deps): bump github.com/rs/zerolog from 1.26.0 to 1.26.1 (#402)
  fix: fix query signing infos command (#407)
  build(deps): bump github.com/spf13/cobra from 1.1.3 to 1.3.0 (#399)
  build(deps): github.com/ulikunitz/xz from 0.5.5 to 0.5.10 (#398)
  build(deps): bump actions/stale from 3 to 4.1.0 (#396)
  build(deps): bump actions/cache from 2.1.3 to 2.1.7 (#386)
  feat: Add the `instantiate_permission` in the `CodeInfoResponse` (#395)
  fix: fix bug where `StoreCodeAndInstantiateContract`, `UpdateContractStatus`, `UpdateContractStatusProposal` API does not work (#393)
  docs: modify with latest version of swagger REST interface docs. (#392)
  fix: fix invalid root hash by bumping up tm-db (#388)
  chore: fix swagger's config path for wasm (#391)
  build(deps): bump technote-space/get-diff-action from 5.0.1 to 5.0.2 (#379)
  fix: update allowance inside AllowedMsgAllowance (#383)
  ...
@zemyblue zemyblue mentioned this pull request Jan 26, 2022
5 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants