feat: use try-runtime-cli instead of command

[moliholy]

Closes #263.

[moliholy]

Added the migration label to check if it works.

[hbulgarini]

nice @moliholy ! thanks for this!

quick question: Are the try-runtime sub commands defined in the node still necessary or we can clean them up?

https://github.com/paritytech/trappist/blob/main/node/src/command.rs#L390:L472

[hbulgarini]

CC: @brunopgalvao

[moliholy]

quick question: Are the try-runtime sub commands defined in the node still necessary or we can clean them up?

@hbulgarini to be honest I wasn't totally sure we should remove the command just yet. Nothing in particular, I simply thought to take a conservative approach and leave both ways to run the try-runtime, just in case.

Anyhow, let's see what @brunopgalvao says.

[brunopgalvao]

Thanks for your work here @moliholy

try-runtime is working nicely with these changes.

Three options that I see:

1. Deprecation of the sub command similar to here:

• https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/14731/files#diff-2596a1f06e9ff71a14b48a5a483ba93a76c1d10ead2dec9f1871895f28711d33

2. Remove the sub command since it is working now with the standalone CLI
3. Remove the sub command in a later release

I am more in favor of 2.

[moliholy]

Three options that I see:

1. Deprecation of the sub command similar to here:

• https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/14731/files#diff-2596a1f06e9ff71a14b48a5a483ba93a76c1d10ead2dec9f1871895f28711d33

2. Remove the sub command since it is working now with the standalone CLI
3. Remove the sub command in a later release

I am more in favor of 2.

Me too. I just added c85650a with the changes.

[moliholy]

I also added 2d53a48 to remove already applied migrations. Otherwise the migration test won't pass.