Initial module boilerplate #322
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Thomasvdam
force-pushed
the
chore/data-proxy-boilerplate
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4870b66
to
8a693c3
Compare
hacheigriega
approved these changes
Aug 15, 2024
Thomasvdam
force-pushed
the
chore/data-proxy-boilerplate
branch
from
8a693c3
to
26927e1
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
Splitting this up into several PRs to try and keep it reviewable... This one's already pretty big and contains a little bit of logic, in hindsight I should have started with an empty module rather than taking the PKR work and changing that until the linter and compiler stopped yelling at me.
I'd appreciate feedback on the following areas in particular:
"data-proxy-registry")"data-proxy-registry")"dataproxyregistry")Explanation of Changes
Mainly boilerplate code in terms of Cosmos side implementation, with the exception of the Params message handling, some message validation basics, and part of the collections on the keeper.
Most of the protobuf definitions are close to what they will probably end up being. However I'm sure I'm misusing some of the annotations with regards to nullability, that will most likely change once I start working with the types and figure out what all the annotations do exactly.
Testing
None, there is barely any implementation that's worth testing by itself, it should all be covered once we start implementing the actual features and testing those.
Related PRs and Issues
Part-of: #316