-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 46
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
chore(deps): upgrade rust-bitcoin
to 0.32.0
#85
chore(deps): upgrade rust-bitcoin
to 0.32.0
#85
Conversation
7efa061
to
ec73101
Compare
ec73101
to
97479dd
Compare
rust-bitcoin
to 0.32.0
rust-bitcoin
to 0.32.0
2743a8a
to
3ca6715
Compare
FWIW the PR description is stale, all the upgrades upto and including |
Thanks! LGTM, just need to remove the patches after I get |
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9287739329Details
💛 - Coveralls |
I just published |
3ca6715
to
81b4695
Compare
The |
81b4695
to
6836628
Compare
Great! I removed the patch, reworded the commit and the description, should be ready to go now. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK 6836628
…ipt` to `0.12.0` and others 1120081 chore(wallet): rm dup code (志宇) 2a45640 deps(bdk): bump `bitcoin` to `0.32.0`, miniscript to `12.0.0` (Leonardo Lima) Pull request description: fixes #1422 <!-- You can erase any parts of this template not applicable to your Pull Request. --> ### Description This PR focuses on upgrading the `rust-bitcoin` and `miniscript` versions, to `0.32.0` and `0.12.0`, respectively. It also bumps the versions of other BDK ecosystem crates that also rely on both `rust-bitcoin` and `miniscript`, being: - electrum-client bitcoindevkit/rust-electrum-client#133 - esplora-client bitcoindevkit/rust-esplora-client#85 - hwi bitcoindevkit/rust-hwi#99 <ins>I structured the PR in multiple commits, with closed scope, being one for each BDK crate being upgraded, and one for each kind of fix and upgrade required, it seems like a lot of commits (**that should be squashed before merging**), but I think it'll make it easier during review phase.</ins> In summary I can already mention some of the main changes: - using `compute_txid()` instead of deprecated `txid()` - using `minimal_non_dust()` instead of `dust_value()` - using the renamed `signature` and `sighash_type` fields - using proper `sighash::P2wpkhError`, `sighash::TaprootError` instead of older `sighash::Error` - conversion from `Network` to new expected `NetworkKind` #1465 - conversion from the new `Weight` type to current expected `usize` #1466 - using `.into()` to convert from AbsLockTime and `RelLockTime` to `absolute::LockTime` and `relative::LockTime` - using Message::from_digest() instead of relying on deprecated `ThirtyTwoByteHash` trait. - updating the miniscript policy and dsl to proper expect and handle new `Threshold` type, instead of the previous two parameters. <!-- Describe the purpose of this PR, what's being adding and/or fixed --> ### Notes to the reviewers <ins>Again, I structured the PR in multiple commits, with closed scope, being one for each BDK crate being upgraded, and one for each kind of fix and upgrade required, it seems like a lot of commits (**that should be squashed before merging**), but I think it'll make it easier during review phase.</ins> It should definitely be carefully reviewed, especially the last commits for the wallet crate scope, the ones with the semantic `fix(wallet)`. I would also appreciate if @tcharding reviewed it, as he gave a try in the past (#1400 ), and I relied on some of it for the policy part of it, other rust-bitcoin maintainers reviews are a definitely welcome 😁 <!-- In this section you can include notes directed to the reviewers, like explaining why some parts of the PR were done in a specific way --> ### Changelog notice > // TODO(@oleonardolima): Do another pass and double check the changes - Use `compute_txid()` instead of deprecated `txid()` - Use `minimal_non_dust()` instead of `dust_value()` - Use `signature` and `sighash_type` fields, instead of previous `sig` and `hash_type` - Use `sighash::P2wpkhError`, and `sighash::TaprootError` instead of older `sighash::Error` - Converts from `Network` to `NetworkKind`, where expected - Converts from `Weight` type to current used `usize` - Use `.into()` to convert from `AbsLockTime` and `RelLockTime` to `absolute::LockTime` and `relative::LockTime` - Remove use of deprecated `ThirtyTwoByteHash` trait, use `Message::from_digest()` - Update the miniscript policy and dsl macros to proper expect and handle new `Threshold` type, instead of the previous two parameters. <!-- Notice the release manager should include in the release tag message changelog --> <!-- See https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.0.0/ for examples --> ### Checklists #### All Submissions: * [x] I've signed all my commits * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) * [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing #### New Features: * [ ] I've added tests for the new feature * [ ] I've added docs for the new feature #### Bugfixes: * [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API * [ ] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing * [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR ACKs for top commit: notmandatory: ACK 1120081 Tree-SHA512: ba1ab64603b41014d3f0866d846167f77d31959ca6f1d9c3181d5e543964f5d772e05651d63935ba7bbffeba41a66868d27de4c32129739b9ca50f3bbaf9f2a1
partially fixes
#1422Description
It updates the rust-bitcoin to 0.32.0, the
bitcoin
crate dependency andelectrsd
to0.28.0
.NOTE: The overall BDK update to
0.32.0
still requires and depends on some other crates, please refer to #1422.Notes to the reviewers
It's open for any comments.
Changelog notice
bitcoin
crate dependency to0.32.0
electrsd
crate dependency to0.28.0
Checklists
All Submissions:
cargo fmt
andcargo clippy
before committingNew Features:
Bugfixes: