Conversation
This reverts commit 4e54444.
This reverts commit d91eb00.
This reverts commit c29c1ab.
This reverts commit 7f0cf54.
This reverts commit 0bea84d.
This reverts commit f5e1a4c.
This reverts commit d50f7ba.
This reverts commit 83fdb7f.
This reverts commit 0b2866d.
This reverts commit c8dc02c.
This reverts commit 0e72d08.
This reverts commit fd6a78a.
This reverts commit 39d8547.
This reverts commit 7aae649.
This reverts commit a14feef.
This reverts commit 8575743.
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| // them with the name of the test suite rather than the test. | ||
| func GetTestContainers(ctx context.Context, suiteName string, dc *dockerclient.Client) ([]dockertypes.Container, error) { | ||
| testContainers, err := dc.ContainerList(ctx, container.ListOptions{ | ||
| testContainers, err := dc.ContainerList(ctx, dockertypes.ContainerListOptions{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does this need to be reverted?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For now, yes. We need to stay on the same docker go library as interchaintest.
I would want to update interchaintest a bit, so might fix that then.
testing/types/expected_keepers.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| // StakingKeeper defines the expected staking keeper interface used in the | ||
| // IBC testing package | ||
| type StakingKeeper interface { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this needed now that we have the eureka changes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope! Good catch, removing now 🙏
aljo242
left a comment
aljo242
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lgtm code wise as long as we are confident in no functionality regressions
|
AdityaSripal
left a comment
AdityaSripal
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good! Thanks for getting this in so fast
| } | ||
|
|
||
| s.ExecuteAndPassGovV1Proposal(ctx, &upgradeProposal, chain, wallet) | ||
| upgradeProposal := upgradetypes.NewSoftwareUpgradeProposal(fmt.Sprintf("upgrade from %s to %s", currentVersion, upgradeVersion), "upgrade chain E2E test", plan) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason there is no if-else clause here as compared to the code here?
3 participants
Description
closes: #7929
Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.
docs/).godoccomments.Files changedin the GitHub PR explorer.SonarCloud Reportin the comment section below once CI passes.