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

[Feature]: Provide a way to create more complex gov proposals for v1 #15982

Closed
alpe opened this issue Apr 28, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

[Feature]: Provide a way to create more complex gov proposals for v1 #15982

alpe opened this issue Apr 28, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@alpe
Copy link
Contributor

alpe commented Apr 28, 2023

Summary

How can more complex gov v1 proposal types be used with the CLI?

With the wasmd upgrade to sdk 47, the v1beta1 gov proposals were deprecated. The SDK provides a "wizard" on the CLI to create json for new gov v1 proposal types. Unfortunately, the wizards does not work nicely with wasmd proposals where we submit encoded wasm files via gov or our other more complex types.

We decided to add a new command to wasmd to submit our proposal types as gov v1 but with the old CLI params. That is a workaround. A solution in the SDK that also works for (test-) scripts would be preferred.

@julienrbrt
Copy link
Member

julienrbrt commented Apr 28, 2023

The "wizard" is definitely for now very basic. I have that somewhere in my todos a task for improving it for complexer types. However, in the general, AFAIK, the idea, is that module configure themselves a CLI for submitting a gov proposal for their messages.
There are helpers for that now: #14700. So basically, like you did in wasmd is the correct way to do it.
EDIT: Maybe this is something that it worth a quick tutorial actually, so this is said and explained more officially somewhere.

@alpe
Copy link
Contributor Author

alpe commented May 3, 2023

Thanks for the infos and confirmation! A tutorial or implementation guide can be very useful.
Not sure how you want to track that work, but it would be ok to close this issue, now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants