-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 353
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
Problem: test_sign_offline fails in 0.44 (fix #644) #761
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #761 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 17.77% 17.77%
=======================================
Files 99 99
Lines 10630 10630
=======================================
Hits 1890 1890
Misses 8300 8300
Partials 440 440
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it looks all right, just a few questions -- e.g. could chainlibpy use the published PyPI version instead?
+ please follow the contribution guidelines, e.g. the commit message format
chainlibpy = "^1.0.0" | ||
# chainlibpy use version 0.2.3 pystarport | ||
pystarport = "=0.2.3" | ||
chainlibpy = { git = "https://github.com/crypto-org-chain/chainlibpy.git", branch = "master" } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can this use the version from PyPI?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we need to release a new version of chainlibpy
.
alice_addr = cluster.address("signer1") | ||
cluster.transfer(alice_addr, offline_addr, "100cro") | ||
wait_for_new_blocks(cluster, 2) | ||
assert cluster.balance(offline_addr) > 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should this assert the amount it was transferred in?
alice_addr = cluster.address("signer1") | ||
cluster.transfer(alice_addr, offline_addr, "100cro") | ||
wait_for_new_blocks(cluster, 2) | ||
assert cluster.balance(offline_addr) > 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should this assert the amount it was transferred in?
good for @macong-cdc to review this, given this is based on #705 |
LGTM. |
@macong-cdc @linfeng-crypto can 2.2.0 for chainlibpy be released? |
integration_tests/pyproject.toml
Outdated
chainlibpy = "^1.0.0" | ||
# chainlibpy use version 0.2.3 pystarport | ||
pystarport = "=0.2.3" | ||
chainlibpy = "2.2.0" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this version doesn't appear to be released on PyPI yet: https://pypi.org/project/chainlibpy/
+ the poetry.lock wasn't updated
9c72e5d
to
8cf05ac
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok by @macong-cdc -- a new version of chainlibpy can be released and the test code can be migrated to it in a separate PR
No description provided.