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

Point Tests to RSKj master (Iris) instead of PAPYRUS #124

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jun 8, 2021

Conversation

jjtechuy
Copy link
Contributor

  • Added parameters for repo, branch and release at config.yml
  • Pointed tests to go against RSKj/master instead of PAPYRUS

@jjtechuy jjtechuy requested a review from julianlen May 14, 2021 18:26
@diegomasini diegomasini self-requested a review May 28, 2021 15:35
Copy link
Contributor

@diegomasini diegomasini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

CI tests are failing with latest change to use master instead of PAPYRUS-2.0.1. I cannot approve this PR until tests are passing again.

Juan Techera added 4 commits June 3, 2021 13:25
- Add report and branch parameters
- Point to rskj/master
Activating Iris HF
@julianlen julianlen requested review from diegomasini and raullaprida and removed request for julianlen June 3, 2021 17:34
Copy link
Contributor

@mortelli mortelli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

checks are passing, so in principle it looks good 👍

leaving a couple of comments down below and some more here.

firstly, @JONAF2103 and @mauricioirace have implemented the following auxiliary function:

https://github.com/rsksmart/enveloping/blob/fdae39d7bab83b9874d9de89d0bbd01e529956a8/test/TestUtils.ts#L497-L502

this could be an alternative to the changes made in this PR to files test/EnvelopingUtils.test.ts, test/relayclient/RelayClient.test.ts and test/relayclient/RelayProvider.test.ts.

lastly: do you think would it be prudent to wait for the official Iris release before merging this PR?

thanks

Comment on lines +220 to +222
- store_artifacts:
path: ~/rsksmart/rskj/rskj-core/build/libs/logs
destination: ~/rskj/logs
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

may i ask why this was added only to test thread #6?

(not entirely sure what the purpose of this is, but mainly curious)

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ const { expect, assert } = chai.use(chaiAsPromised).use(sinonChai)
const TestVerifierConfigurableMisbehavior = artifacts.require('TestVerifierConfigurableMisbehavior')
const TestDeployVerifierConfigurableMisbehavior = artifacts.require('TestDeployVerifierConfigurableMisbehavior')

const revertReasonSupported = false
const revertReasonSupported = true
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

rather than having this const as true, wouldn't it be better to remove it and have the affected test like this?:

    describe('#validateViewCallSucceeds()', function () {
      // RelayHub contract
      it('should fail to relay rejected transaction', async function () {
        const req = await env.createRelayHttpRequest()

        req.metadata.signature = INCORRECT_ECDSA_SIGNATURE
        const method = env.relayHub.contract.methods.relayCall(req.relayRequest, req.metadata.signature)

        try {
          await env.relayServer.validateViewCallSucceeds(method, req, 2000000)
          assert.fail()
        } catch (e) {
          assert.include(e.message, 'signature mismatch')
        }
      })
    })

Copy link
Collaborator

@raullaprida raullaprida left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

Copy link
Contributor

@diegomasini diegomasini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

@diegomasini diegomasini merged commit 2224d97 into master Jun 8, 2021
@delete-merged-branch delete-merged-branch bot deleted the change-branch branch June 8, 2021 17:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants