-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 680
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
polkadot-parachain
: Unify asset-hub authoring codepath with general AURA
#4932
Conversation
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.
If we do this, we should do it properly. Basically all the start_whatever_node
can just be deleted and all of them can just use start_basic_lookahead_node
.
@@ -635,109 +630,42 @@ where | |||
para_id, | |||
build_parachain_rpc_extensions::<RuntimeApi>, |
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 entire function is not required.
If there are no concerns related to the conceptual change in this PR, I think it would be ok to merge it as it is. I have a lot of cleanup related to |
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'm not very familiar with the consensus logic. I would prefer if someone with more knowledge of this logic would take a look also. But apart from that, looks good to me.
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.
If @serban300 is getting rid of this in his next pr, we can continue.
… AURA (paritytech#4932) Recently thought about the special handling we have for asset-hub chains. They started with relay chain consensus and transitioned to AURA at some point. However, nobody should be authoring with relay chain consensus on these chains anymore, the transition is long done. I propose to remove this special handling, allowing us to unify one more execution path.
… AURA (paritytech#4932) Recently thought about the special handling we have for asset-hub chains. They started with relay chain consensus and transitioned to AURA at some point. However, nobody should be authoring with relay chain consensus on these chains anymore, the transition is long done. I propose to remove this special handling, allowing us to unify one more execution path.
Recently thought about the special handling we have for asset-hub chains. They started with relay chain consensus and transitioned to AURA at some point. However, nobody should be authoring with relay chain consensus on these chains anymore, the transition is long done.
I propose to remove this special handling, allowing us to unify one more execution path.