polkadot-parachain: compile separate lib and bin#5288
polkadot-parachain: compile separate lib and bin#5288serban300 merged 18 commits intoparitytech:masterfrom serban300:polkadot-parachain-lib
Conversation
| // You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License | ||
| // along with Cumulus. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. | ||
|
|
||
| use crate::chain_spec::{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@athei is this parachain even needed anymore? perhaps we should remove it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We are working on a new testnet for for pallet_revive, I think it's safe to get rid of this one now
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, something to do in a follow-up then @serban300 :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lgtm module some kind of usage doc. What can I do with this lib now? what benefit it has to a parachain team? (except if you are @xlc and you know because you requested this 😉)
You can put it in the main lib.rs, and in the PR description.
@PierreBesson from what I can see, you should brace for either:
- Parity needs to generate its own omni-node in order to keep things like
--chain asset-hubbackwards compatible. - Parity should prepare to replace all
--chain <fixed-string>to--chain <json-file>.
In all honesty, I regret not pushing harder for separating polkadot-parachain and omni-node. We could have left polkadot-parachain as is for eternity, and started working on a fresh fork of it, giving us all the flexibility in the world. The fact that the omni-node is called polkadot-parachain (we agreed to not rename it in a separate PR) also still sounds counterproductive to me. It is buzz-killer. I do hope we rename it someday once the dust has settled :)
The benefit of what we do now is it that we are forced to dogfood the process of going from --chain name to --chain spec.json.
|
The CI pipeline was cancelled due to failure one of the required jobs. |
| [features] | ||
| default = [] | ||
| runtime-benchmarks = [ | ||
| "cumulus-primitives-core/runtime-benchmarks", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we probably can remove all those features. I don't really know why they exists at the first place
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If it's related to runtime-benchmarks I answered on a different comment below
|
|
||
| [features] | ||
| default = [] | ||
| runtime-benchmarks = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what are those for? we should use the standalone bencher and try-runtime-cli
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We still need them in the CI for the bot ... commands. There is an item for removing them after we migrate the CI commands to the omni-bencher: #4966
cumulus/polkadot-parachain/polkadot-parachain-lib/src/common/chain_spec.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
I am trying this at https://github.com/AcalaNetwork/acala-node |
xlc
left a comment
xlc
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you will need the build.rs file in the bin, not in the lib
CommandConfig -> RunConfig copyright start year -> u16
Done |
Removed the
I guess this is normal since probably both versions are needed. |
skunert
left a comment
skunert
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good and useful to me, nice work!
cumulus/polkadot-parachain/polkadot-parachain-lib/src/common/chain_spec.rs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
cumulus/polkadot-parachain/polkadot-parachain-lib/src/common/chain_spec.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Related to: #5210 Follow-up for #5288, as per this comment: #5288 (comment) I hope I understood this correctly.
There were already previous efforts to remove the contracts-rococo chain, see #5471, which was done as a response to this comment #5288 (comment). This PR intends to fix the parts that were overlooked back then, and remove all traces of contracts-rococo as it is intended to be replaced by a new testnet including pallet-revive.
7 participants
Related to #5210