Skip to content
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

What SDK code hash was this extracted from ? #188

Closed
ebuchman opened this issue May 23, 2021 · 3 comments · Fixed by #194
Closed

What SDK code hash was this extracted from ? #188

ebuchman opened this issue May 23, 2021 · 3 comments · Fixed by #194

Comments

@ebuchman
Copy link
Member

ebuchman commented May 23, 2021

Would be good to say explicitly in the CHANGELOG what commit hash of the SDK this was forked from. Presumably its something after v0.42.0 and contains 3bbda1430c1833983f66857a12d84166ff627a5a , the last commit in the SDK to change the x/ibc module.

I was looking to make a change to the ibc CLI (add query ibc-transfer escrow-address so we can get the address for each channel so we can easily see how many coins are escrowed in a channel) but I guess I'll have to make the PR both to the SDK and to this repo ?

@colin-axner
Copy link
Contributor

colin-axner commented May 24, 2021

I can add the commit IBC was removed from the SDK and brought here da064e13d56add466548135739c5860a9f7ed842, but I'm not sure I follow why that'd be useful

Due to error and proposal type registrations, the IBC code cannot live in the SDK and here simultaneously. So IBC was removed during the 0.43.0 development cycle. We have to wait for an SDK v0.43.0 before we can officially do a release since we cannot depend on v0.42.x versions.

Does this explanation help?

@colin-axner
Copy link
Contributor

I can add a note to the changelog indicating that backports should be to the SDK release/v0.42.x branch

@ebuchman
Copy link
Member Author

RIght I was mostly just looking to ensure that any changes that are happening to IBC in the SDK repo (like the command I just added) will be replayed in this repo. It looks that command would be the first instance of that. Otherwise probably just good practice to include the hash somewhere for historical/verifiability reasons so people looking back can understand when this branched out.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants