-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
Update runtime v1.2.8 #127
Conversation
raynaudoe
commented
Sep 3, 2024
•
edited by al3mart
Loading
edited by al3mart
- Update relay chain to v1.2.8
- Update Asset Hub to v1.2.8
- Update Bridge Hub to v1.2.8
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: success System ParachainsStatus: failure ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: success System ParachainsStatus: failure ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: cancelled System ParachainsStatus: failure ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: cancelled System ParachainsStatus: failure ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: success System ParachainsStatus: failure ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: success System ParachainsStatus: failure ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Updates Snowbridge integration tests
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: success System ParachainsStatus: failure ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: success System ParachainsStatus: failure ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: cancelled System ParachainsStatus: success ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: cancelled System ParachainsStatus: success ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: cancelled System ParachainsStatus: cancelled ❌ Some tests have failed. Please check the details above for more information. |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: success System ParachainsStatus: success ✅ All tests have passed successfully! |
Tests have finished. Relay ChainStatus: success System ParachainsStatus: success ✅ All tests have passed successfully! |
|
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.
It seems that we still have a couple of references to Kusama here and there.
I think we would want to remove them or substitute them for a Westend config instead.
@@ -943,6 +976,7 @@ construct_runtime!( | |||
PolkadotXcm: pallet_xcm = 31, | |||
CumulusXcm: cumulus_pallet_xcm = 32, | |||
// DmpQueue: cumulus_pallet_dmp_queue = 33, removed | |||
ToKusamaXcmRouter: pallet_xcm_bridge_hub_router::<Instance1> = 34, |
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.
Do we need this ?
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.
I believe we do. Is much easier for backporting future releases to have the most similar runtime even if the bridge is never activated.
/// XCM router instance to BridgeHub with bridging capabilities for `Kusama` global | ||
/// consensus with dynamic fees and back-pressure. | ||
pub type ToKusamaXcmRouterInstance = pallet_xcm_bridge_hub_router::Instance1; | ||
impl pallet_xcm_bridge_hub_router::Config<ToKusamaXcmRouterInstance> for Runtime { |
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.
As per my other comment, do we need this pallet implemented for KusamaRouter ?
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.
I believe we do. Is much easier for backporting future releases to have the most similar runtime even if the bridge is never activated.
] | ||
); | ||
|
||
pub const KusamaNetwork: NetworkId = NetworkId::Kusama; |
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.
Maybe let's use Westend instead ?
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.
As it's not in the roadmap for the short term to deploy Westend bridge, i think this is an additional overhead where the demand for this is not justified.
|
apis: RUNTIME_API_VERSIONS, | ||
transaction_version: 4, | ||
state_version: 1, | ||
spec_name: create_runtime_str!("bridge-hub-paseo"), |
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.
Unfortunately bridge hub was launch with the spec name bridge-hub-polkadot
.
To keep this change in we have to be careful of upgrading the network by approving the new code with system.authorizeUpgradeWithoutChecks
.
Nothing to block the changes from merging, but something to have into consideration when it comes to enacting this new code.