fix: marks rococo as deprecated and should be replaced with contracts
#60
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 2e23a13 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
…be replaced with `contracts`, as `rococo` is the testnet relay chain not the smart contracts chain users interact with
|
Amazing to see the first "external" contributions kicking in! 🤩 Just opened a new |
wottpal
requested changes
Jan 25, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We should use the correct names of the networks we interact with. Rococo is the relay chain and not capable of any smart contract interaction. We always talk to the
Contractsparachain of Rococo. We should make this clear to resolve confusions. I agree the namecontractsfor a parachain is not very insightful, but that is what we are stuck with right now. :)