use cabbage tests from a separate repo #1636
Conversation
Makefile
Outdated
| @@ -250,6 +250,9 @@ init-contracts-reorg: clean-contracts | |||
| PLASMA_FRAMEWORK_TX_HASH=$$PLASMA_FRAMEWORK_TX_HASH PLASMA_FRAMEWORK=$$PLASMA_FRAMEWORK \ | |||
| PAYMENT_EIP712_LIBMOCK=$$PAYMENT_EIP712_LIBMOCK MERKLE_WRAPPER=$$MERKLE_WRAPPER ERC20_MINTABLE=$$ERC20_MINTABLE | |||
|
|
|||
| init-integration-tests: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we git submodule perhaps?
|
🤔 a bit out topic of this PR. But do we want the cc. @achiurizo @T-Dnzt @kasima |
.circleci/config.yml
Outdated
| @@ -581,19 +591,23 @@ jobs: | |||
| key: v2-mix-specs-cache-{{ .Branch }}-{{ checksum "mix.lock" }} | |||
| - run: | |||
| name: Print watcher logs | |||
| command: docker-compose -f docker-compose.yml -f ./priv/cabbage/docker-compose-reorg.yml -f ./priv/cabbage/docker-compose-cabbage.yml logs --follow watcher | |||
| command: docker-compose -f docker-compose.yml -f ./priv/cabbage/docker-compose-reorg.yml -f ./priv/cabbage/docker-compose-2-specs.yml logs --follow watcher | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
how do we name this better, docker-compose-2-specs is confusing I think...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@InoMurko it means the docker-compose version 2. the childchain users version 3. what do you think about docker-compose-version-2-specs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh, okay... that's the reason then. perhaps there's two things:
- should we name them by functionality?
- should we wrap these into makefile recipes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@InoMurko I moved to makefile. It doesn't have any functionality, it only overrides 2 env variables
Let's figure this out later once we are comfortable with how we run the |
|
Why do we even wants to move to private repo now though? I can guess why you’d like to move to separate repo but i don’t see why private yet. This change of moving it private is a degradation of what we are providing to the users now but I don’t see any discussion and justification reasoning. Would appreciate if this kinds of change can clearly list out the motivation of change in PR or have early discussion with the team 🙏 |
|
@InoMurko I added a section about running integration tests to README |
|
At least a partial reason for having these tests private is the future compliance with childchain2. Tests there will expose some of the underlying functionality we probably don't want the world to see. Or maybe we do (from the top of my head):
Also, the pain of having public and private repos is getting annoying because of potential leakage of internal issues/security stuff/new customers/... So having a thin open presence of mainly watchers is, from my perspective, better. |
📋 Add associated issues, tickets, docs URL here.
Overview
Describe what your Pull Request is about in a few sentences.
Changes
Describe your changes and implementation choices. More details make PRs easier to review.
Testing
Describe how to test your new feature/bug fix and if possible, a step by step guide on how to demo this.