Bump substrate#220
Conversation
…moves duplicate imports)
|
Sorry, I did some minor beautification while debugging the broken no_std build: found this unfortunately: #218 (comment) |
| @@ -1,3768 +0,0 @@ | |||
| # This file is automatically @generated by Cargo. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was this a conscious decision to remove the lock file? I am uncertain if I approve:
- Local builds are getting less reproducible
- We can no longer check in the lock file, which version works.
I know they say that libraries should not have a lock-file, but we have a hybrid case, we want to be able to build the example binaries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I added it again for now, we could discuss that another time.
| @@ -1,3768 +0,0 @@ | |||
| # This file is automatically @generated by Cargo. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was this a conscious decision to remove the lock file? I am uncertain if I approve:
- Local builds are getting less reproducible
- We can no longer check in the lock file, which version works.
I know they say that libraries should not have a lock-file, but we have a hybrid case, we want to be able to build the example binaries.
clangenb
changed the title
haerdib
left a comment
haerdib
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One small comment, otherwise it looks good :)
| ] | ||
|
|
||
| [[package]] | ||
| name = "parity-scale-codec" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We now have two versions of parity-scale-codec.
I took a short look at the lock file, and it seems the old codec version is imported due to an old version of primitive-types, defined here:
substrate-api-client/Cargo.toml
Line 21 in 8a8f305
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will fix this. Good catch.
3 participants
Closes #218.
Changes: