feat: file base genesis source/target

[JayT106]

ADR-061 defined the genesis source/target interface as part of the core APIs. This PR implements the file-based genesis source/target suggested by #12808 (comment) and is able to support reworking the genesis import/export in PR #13032 .

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• included the correct type prefix in the PR title
• added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
• provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
• followed the guidelines for building modules
• included the necessary unit and integration tests
• added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
• included comments for documenting Go code
• updated the relevant documentation or specification
• reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
• confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic
• reviewed API design and naming
• reviewed documentation is accurate
• reviewed tests and test coverage
• manually tested (if applicable)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #13724 (d62bb9c) into main (2739f83) will increase coverage by 0.56%.
The diff coverage is 58.10%.

❗ Current head d62bb9c differs from pull request most recent head fafd034. Consider uploading reports for the commit fafd034 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #13724      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   56.25%   56.82%   +0.56%     
==========================================
  Files         667      640      -27     
  Lines       56576    55047    -1529     
==========================================
- Hits        31829    31280     -549     
+ Misses      22165    21217     -948     
+ Partials     2582     2550      -32     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
core/genesis/file.go	58.10% <58.10%> (ø)
x/auth/keeper/genesis.go	0.00% <0.00%> (-50.00%)	⬇️
x/auth/keeper/account.go	53.33% <0.00%> (-18.34%)	⬇️
x/group/internal/math/dec.go	41.53% <0.00%> (-7.00%)	⬇️
x/gov/abci.go	90.29% <0.00%> (-6.86%)	⬇️
server/config/config.go	69.87% <0.00%> (-2.65%)	⬇️
x/nft/keeper/grpc_query.go	69.38% <0.00%> (-1.45%)	⬇️
x/nft/client/cli/query.go	61.72% <0.00%> (-0.72%)	⬇️
x/group/msgs.go	57.35% <0.00%> (-0.25%)	⬇️
server/mock/tx.go	53.33% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 62 more

[julienrbrt]

lgtm, just few nits! I'd like to still have @aaronc review this as he's the one who described this feature.

[aaronc]

Thanks @JayT106 🙏. Looks good so far. Will try to do a more thorough review later today.

[JayT106]

Thanks @JayT106 🙏. Looks good so far. Will try to do a more thorough review later today.

Thanks for your suggestion and proposal @aaronc

[aaronc]

This looks like a great start thank you @JayT106 !

We need to handle the spec correctly which I tried to outline in my comments. Apologies if this wasn't clear before. Let me know if the comments make sense.

[JayT106]

not sure how to pass the dependency review with btcd@0.22.3, The SDK also uses this module version. I tried using btcd@0.23.3 has another module dependency issue.

[odeke-em]

Nice work and thank you for this change @JayT106! I've added a review, please take a look.

[julienrbrt]

not sure how to pass the dependency review with btcd@0.22.3, The SDK also uses this module version. I tried using btcd@0.23.3 has another module dependency issue.

Yep, I don't know either, but we should investigate given that it is starting to block multiple PRs: #13701 (comment)

[JayT106]

not sure how to pass the dependency review with btcd@0.22.3, The SDK also uses this module version. I tried using btcd@0.23.3 has another module dependency issue.

Yep, I don't know either, but we should investigate given that it is starting to block multiple PRs: #13701 (comment)

submit an issue to tendermint
tendermint/tendermint#9783

[odeke-em]

Thank you for this change @JayT106 and for your patience! I've sent my second round of review but the highlight here is that:

• No need to create a bytes.Buffer then do buf.ReadFrom(reader), then do buf.Bytes() or buf.String(); there is io.ReadAll(reader) per https://pkg.go.dev/io#ReadAll which will sort things out
• Anytime you find yourself doing .Write([]byte(str)) then later a comparison in which you have to convert bytes to a string just to compare with str, that means you could have rather kept the value of str as a byteslice

Thank you!

[JayT106]

Thank you for this change @JayT106 and for your patience! I've sent my second round of review but the highlight here is that:

@odeke-em, very much appreciate your time in reviewing the code. I've updated all the places.

[aaronc]

This seems like it's going conceptually in the right direction now @JayT106. But I think the logic is not quite correct yet and could be simplified.

Basically when a FileGenesisSource is created we have three things:

1. sourceDir
2. moduleName
3. the RawJSON that came from app_state_bytes from RequestInitChain

I don't think we should be trying to open <sourceDir>/genesis.json, instead the function creating FileGenesisSource should have already parsed app_state_bytes from RequestInitChain and passes the json.RawMessage for that module into FileGenesisSource.

Then we try first reading <module>/<field>.json, then <module>.json, and finally the json.RawMessage that got passed into NewFileGenesisSource

[JayT106]

@aaronc to align with #14223, I've added 2 functions to fulfill the appmodule requirement. See
ad0193b (will add tests in the following commit).

[tac0turtle]

@aaronc could we get a review from you on this pr

[yihuang]

I guess with the new collections feature solving the genesis streaming problem, there's less motivation to pursue this PR? Or can this PR work together with collections? @JayT106

[aaronc]

The genesis API that we ended up adopting in core (and that collections and ORM use) is significantly simpler than the one originally proposed. There is no need to support the Read/WriteMessage and Read/WriteRawJSON methods anymore so these can be deleted from this PR. That should make the implementation significantly simpler. Do you intend to move this forward with those changes @JayT106? If not someone on the SDK team can probably push it over the finish line.

[JayT106]

@aaronc @yihuang yes, the collections feature could solve the genesis issues better. Close this PR for now.

[aaronc]

I would note that file based genesis is not supported yet in the SDK or collections. So at some point we'll need to pick up the remaining pieces to get it to work (some of which can be pulled from this PR)