refactor: Revert middlewares to antehandler (part 2/2: posthandler)

[amaury1093]

Description

We decided to remove middlewares, and revert to antehandlers (exactly like in v045) for this release. A better middleware solution will be implemented after v046.

ref: #11955

This PR is part 2 of 2:

• part 1: Revert baseapp and middlewares to v0.45.4
• part 2: Add posthandler, tips, priority

Depends on:

• refactor: Revert middlewares to antehandlers (part 1/2: baseapp) #11979

---

Suggestion for reviewers:

• Apart from correctness, I would also like someone to review exhaustiveness. I.e. all changes we made in v046 into the middleware folder are reflected in this PR, and that I didn't forget anything. I found the following ones:
  • add a TxFeeChecker in DeductFee
  • add a ExtensionChecker in ExtCheckerDecorator
  • add a TipDecorator

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• included the correct type prefix in the PR title
• added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
• provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
• followed the guidelines for building modules
• included the necessary unit and integration tests
• added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
• included comments for documenting Go code
• updated the relevant documentation or specification
• reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
• confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic
• reviewed API design and naming
• reviewed documentation is accurate
• reviewed tests and test coverage
• manually tested (if applicable)

[alexanderbez]

LGTM, but I don't see anywhere where we use ctx.Priority for CheckTx?

[amaury1093]

LGTM, but I don't see anywhere where we use ctx.Priority for CheckTx?

Oh yeah good catch, see 35866ff.

[faddat]

hey, if it is possible to "lgtm" that would be super because this PR is now blocking the refactors we need to do for craft. Thanks guys.

[amaury1093]

Any opinions if we should enable Tips by default on simapp (note: all chains that will copy-paste simapp might also enable them)? Is it a use case that's generic enough to be enabled by default on all cosmos chains?

I'd personally say no, and it's more a specific use-case, but would like to hear other opinions.

[faddat]

I would go with a yes, when we built craft, one of the discoveries that I think that we had is that an application template with all of the features turned on would be useful. Also, if we have this turned on in simapp, it gets tested

[faddat]

But if it’s there and come and to down at least it can be used. Just so that you know, craft began as an implementation of simapp.

basically I’d like to see a Nonsimapp app template in the sdk

I’ve been calling that tiny.

[faddat]

For various reasons Gaia is no longer a great template. Unfortunately the same can be said of starport.

[faddat]

Like yourself I think it’s not too much of a big deal in either direction if this is present directly in the simulation app or not but I would lean toward including it

[amaury1093]

Going to put automerge on, to unblock downstream work.

Two decisions still need to be made:

1. Should posthandlers run in their own store branch? refactor: Revert middlewares to antehandler (part 2/2: posthandler) #11985 (comment). Currently: no, they run in the same one as runMsgs
2. Should tips be included in simapp by default? refactor: Revert middlewares to antehandler (part 2/2: posthandler) #11985 (comment). Currently: no, it's an opt-in feature.

I can create a follow-up PR if any decision changes on the two items above.

[faddat]

thanks @AmauryM :)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #11985 (92c1f0b) into main (b2af716) will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 78.14%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #11985      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   66.02%   66.00%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         672      671       -1     
  Lines       71232    70959     -273     
==========================================
- Hits        47032    46834     -198     
+ Misses      21523    21470      -53     
+ Partials     2677     2655      -22     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
baseapp/options.go	66.03% <0.00%> (-2.59%)	⬇️
types/context.go	88.40% <0.00%> (-2.64%)	⬇️
x/auth/ante/sigverify.go	67.41% <0.00%> (-0.66%)	⬇️
x/auth/client/testutil/suite.go	94.28% <68.75%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
simapp/app.go	81.05% <70.00%> (-0.95%)	⬇️
baseapp/baseapp.go	79.63% <77.77%> (-0.89%)	⬇️
x/auth/ante/fee.go	82.35% <87.50%> (ø)
x/auth/ante/ext.go	90.00% <89.47%> (-10.00%)	⬇️
x/auth/ante/validator_tx_fee.go	92.30% <92.30%> (ø)
baseapp/abci.go	64.05% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
... and 8 more