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

Update "Deploy Linked Token" GH action to support Proxy upgrade pattern #854

Draft
wants to merge 74 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

snissn
Copy link
Contributor

@snissn snissn commented Apr 2, 2024

This PR adds support for proxy upgrades to the linked_token_deployment branch which is now in Main.

Currently the check makes it to make deploy-replica-proxy and then fails with the error:

err: (code: 2, message: expected sequence 11, got 12, data: Some(String("")))

next step to investigate that is to see if the account sending transactions related to the linked token is separate from an ipc validator and to make it its own funded account if it is not


This change is Reviewable

@snissn snissn removed the request for review from mb1896 April 4, 2024 20:38
@snissn snissn changed the title Deploy linked token script to support the proxy pattern Update Deploy LinkedToken GH action to support Proxy pattern Apr 8, 2024
@snissn snissn changed the title Update Deploy LinkedToken GH action to support Proxy pattern Update "Deploy Linked Token" GH action to support Proxy pattern Apr 8, 2024
@snissn snissn changed the title Update "Deploy Linked Token" GH action to support Proxy pattern Update "Deploy Linked Token" GH action to support Proxy upgrade pattern Apr 8, 2024
@maciejwitowski
Copy link
Contributor

@snissn what is the plan for this PR? I assume it also supersedes #789 which could be closed, right?

@snissn
Copy link
Contributor Author

snissn commented Apr 23, 2024

@maciejwitowski that assumption is correct. I was optimistically working on this and it's also turning into a large time sync. The code has a dependency on a server that I don't know the details about, takes a long time to run so it's hard to test, and seemed to have quirks that I haven't gotten deep into where it would be flaky - I think due to multiple runs of tests happening a time. For now I had just left it but do not have a clear plan because of the cost benefit analysis on how much time to fix vs how much its worth fixing.

@karlem
Copy link
Contributor

karlem commented Feb 3, 2025

@consensus-shipyard/ipc-core-devs I would suggest to close the issue as it is not something critical and it does not work.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants