Skip to content

Omni-Node renamings#5915

Merged
serban300 merged 6 commits intoparitytech:masterfrom
serban300:polkadot-parachain-renamings
Oct 8, 2024
Merged

Omni-Node renamings#5915
serban300 merged 6 commits intoparitytech:masterfrom
serban300:polkadot-parachain-renamings

Conversation

@serban300
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@serban300 serban300 commented Oct 3, 2024 •
edited
Loading

  • moved the omni-node lib from
    cumulus/polkadot-parachain/polkadot-parachain-lib to
    cumulus/polkadot-omni-node/lib
  • renamed polkadot-parachain-lib to polkadot-omni-node-lib
  • added polkadot-omni-node binary

Related to #5566

@serban300 serban300 added the T0-node This PR/Issue is related to the topic “node”. label Oct 3, 2024
@serban300 serban300 self-assigned this Oct 3, 2024
@skunert
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

skunert commented Oct 4, 2024

I am not entirely sure if we gain something from this naming. To us its maybe obvious. But looking from the outside, polkadot-parachain or even just parachain-node sounds more intuitive and less surprising to me. In the end this is exactly what it is, just a parachain-node.

@serban300
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

serban300 commented Oct 4, 2024

I am not entirely sure if we gain something from this naming. To us its maybe obvious. But looking from the outside, polkadot-parachain or even just parachain-node sounds more intuitive and less surprising to me. In the end this is exactly what it is, just a parachain-node.

@kianenigma what do you think ?

@kianenigma
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

kianenigma commented Oct 4, 2024

(have not read the code yet)

I am not surprised to see pushback on the renaming 🙈

I am in favor of the renaming. Here's my reasons:

  1. It amplifies the code-word of the project "omni-something". It is a guess, but I think it is more comprehensible to repeat the omni-prefix in all such tools.
  2. Calling it parachain-node and/or polkadot-parachain prevents us from ever even imagining adding more abilities related to being a solo-chain to this node, something that I guess even parachain teams reasonably want esp. to run a testnet.
  3. It changes nothing about polkadot-parachain: It remains as is, and it is indeed "Just a polkadot parachain node" as @skunert puts it.

Perhaps the confusion is partly because my original issue was lacking on point (remove any chainspec from the generic polkadot-omni-node). The outcome of this PR should be:

  1. rename the library crate to polkadot-omni-node-lib. This is hidden from all users atm, because no one is using this crate yet (unless if you are @xlc and acala-node).
  2. polkadot-parachain remains 100% as-is, and it is an instantiation of polkadot-omni-node-lib with all polkadot-related chainspecs hardcoded. This makes perfect sense to me in terms of naming: A parachain node, built from the generic polkadot-omni-node-lib, that is specialized for running Polkadot system chains, ergo polakdot-parachain.
  3. polkadot-omni-node is a new binary, which is a raw instantiation of polkadot-omni-node-lib without any chainspecs or specialization.

So when looked at this way, we are not really touching polkadot-parachain. It remains as-is, and we are adding a new binary that is the more generic version of it.

kianenigma
kianenigma reviewed Oct 4, 2024
View reviewed changes
Cargo.toml Outdated
"cumulus/polkadot-parachain",
"cumulus/polkadot-parachain/polkadot-parachain-lib",
"cumulus/polkadot-omni-node/polkadot-omni-node-lib",
"cumulus/polkadot-omni-node/polkadot-parachain",
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@kianenigma kianenigma Oct 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So just looking at this file, i can confirm that this is not what I intended (as noted, my original issue was not super clear). High level, expect to see something like:

cumulus/polkadot-parachain should stay. This is also crucial for our internal devops to not put a bounty on my head.
cumulus/polkadot-omni-node should be a new crate.
cumulus/polkadot-parachain-lib -> cumulus/polkadot-omni-node/lib

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@serban300 serban300 Oct 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, I misunderstood the requirement a bit. Will fix it.

@skunert
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

skunert commented Oct 4, 2024

(have not read the code yet)

I am not surprised to see pushback on the renaming 🙈

I am in favor of the renaming. Here's my reasons:

1. It amplifies the code-word of the project "omni-_something_". It is a guess, but I think it is more comprehensible to repeat the omni-prefix in all such tools.

2. Calling it `parachain-node` and/or `polkadot-parachain` prevents us from ever even _imagining_ adding more abilities related to being a solo-chain to this node, something that I [guess even parachain teams reasonably want](https://github.com/orgs/paritytech/projects/157/views/1?pane=issue&itemId=82036322) esp. to run a testnet.

3. It changes nothing about polkadot-parachain: It remains as is, and it is indeed "Just a polkadot parachain node" as @skunert puts it.

Perhaps the confusion is partly because my original issue was lacking on point (remove any chainspec from the generic polkadot-omni-node). The outcome of this PR should be:

0. rename the library crate to `polkadot-omni-node-lib`. This is hidden from all users atm, because no one is using this crate yet (unless if you are @xlc and `acala-node`).

1. `polkadot-parachain` remains 100% as-is, and it is an instantiation of `polkadot-omni-node-lib` with all polkadot-related chainspecs hardcoded. This makes perfect sense to me in terms of naming: A parachain node, built from the generic `polkadot-omni-node-lib`, that is specialized for running Polkadot system chains, ergo `polakdot-parachain`.

2. `polkadot-omni-node` is a new binary, which is a raw instantiation of `polkadot-omni-node-lib` without any chainspecs or specialization.

So when looked at this way, we are not really touching polkadot-parachain. It remains as-is, and we are adding a new binary that is the more generic version of it.

These are good points, I also forgot about frame-omni-bencher which goes nicely with this.

@kianenigma
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

kianenigma commented Oct 4, 2024 •
edited
Loading

These are good points, I also forgot about frame-omni-bencher which goes nicely with this.

In my dreams, the binary list that one would see in our release pages would be:

  1. polkadot-parachain
  2. polkadot-omni-node
  3. polkadot-omni-bencher
  4. polkadot-omni-chain-spec-builder

Not to late to rename them? idk. But given Polkadot Omni Node (view) in the roadmap, I won't push for this. Goal is to allow users to to all of this in just polkadot-omni-node.

@serban300 another small action item that comes to mind here is to ensure that as a consequence of this PR, polkadot-omni-node is also released. This requires a few GH/GL action files to be edited, #5387 is probably a good example. CC @EgorPopelyaev

@serban300
Omni-Node renamings
00c0dce 
- moved the omni-node lib from
  `cumulus/polkadot-parachain/polkadot-parachain-lib` to
  `cumulus/polkadot-omni-node/lib`
- renamed `polkadot-parachain-lib` to `polkadot-omni-node-lib`
@serban300
Add polkadot-omni-node binary
e3bf5ad
@serban300
Add prdoc
7ae8dd2
@serban300
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

serban300 commented Oct 7, 2024 •
edited
Loading

So just looking at this file, i can confirm that this is not what I intended (as noted, my original issue was not super clear). High level, expect to see something like:

cumulus/polkadot-parachain should stay. This is also crucial for our internal devops to not put a bounty on my head. cumulus/polkadot-omni-node should be a new crate. cumulus/polkadot-parachain-lib -> cumulus/polkadot-omni-node/lib

@kianenigma @skunert I addressed this comment. I had to force push because there were a lot of conflicts. Can you PTAL ? This PR only contains the renamings and also added the polkadot-omni-node binary. I will implement the part about publishing the polkadot-omni-node binary in a different PR. Would like to merge this one as soon as possible to avoid merge conflicts since it moves a lot of files.

skunert
skunert approved these changes Oct 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@skunert skunert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice!

prdoc/pr_5915.prdoc Outdated
doc:
- audience: Node Dev
description: |
This PR renames the `polkadot-parachain-lib` crate to `polkadot-omni-node-lib`.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@skunert skunert Oct 8, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We could mention the introduction of polkadot-omni-node binary.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@serban300 serban300 Oct 8, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point ! Done.

kianenigma
kianenigma reviewed Oct 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
kianenigma
kianenigma reviewed Oct 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
@serban300 serban300 added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 8, 2024
Merged via the queue into paritytech:master with commit a4dce86 Oct 8, 2024
@serban300 serban300 deleted the polkadot-parachain-renamings branch October 8, 2024 12:49
@serban300 serban300 mentioned this pull request Oct 8, 2024
Closed
3 tasks
ordian added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2024
@ordian
Merge branch 'master' into ao-fix-issue-64
2b29d09 
* master: (28 commits)
  `substrate-node`: removed excessive polkadot-sdk features (#5925)
  Rename QueueEvent::StartWork (#6015)
  [ci] Remove quick-benchmarks-omni from GitLab (#6014)
  Set larger timeout for cmd.yml (#6006)
  Fix `0003-beefy-and-mmr` test (#6003)
  Remove redundant XCMs from dry run's forwarded xcms (#5913)
  Add RadiumBlock bootnodes to Coretime Polkadot Chain spec (#5967)
  Bump strum from 0.26.2 to 0.26.3 (#5943)
  Add PVF execution priority (#4837)
  Snowbridge V2 docs (#5902)
  Fix u256 conversion in BABE (#5994)
  [ci] Move test-linux-stable-no-try-runtime to GHA (#5979)
  Bump PoV request timeout (#5924)
  [Release/CI] Github flow to build `polkadot`/`polkadot-parachain` rc binaries and deb package (#5963)
  [ci] Remove short-benchmarks from Gitlab (#5988)
  Disable flaky tests reported in 5972/5973/5974 (#5976)
  Bump some dependencies (#5886)
  bump zombienet version and set request for k8s (#5968)
  [omni-bencher] Make all runtimes work (#5872)
  Omni-Node renamings (#5915)
  ...
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 26, 2025
Closed
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Mar 20, 2025
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@kianenigma kianenigma kianenigma approved these changes

@skunert skunert skunert approved these changes

Assignees

@serban300 serban300

Labels

T0-node This PR/Issue is related to the topic “node”.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@serban300 @skunert @kianenigma @pgherveou