Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Electra: field renames #14091

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jun 12, 2024
Merged

Electra: field renames #14091

merged 9 commits into from
Jun 12, 2024

Conversation

james-prysm
Copy link
Contributor

@james-prysm james-prysm commented Jun 7, 2024

What type of PR is this?

Other

What does this PR do? Why is it needed?

  • renames DepositReceipt to DepositRequest
  • renames ExecutionLayerWithdrawalRequest to WithdrawalRequest
  • renames ValidatorPublicKey to ValidatorPubkey on execution API

missing

Which issues(s) does this PR fix?

dependent on following PRs merged and released
ethereum/consensus-specs#3757
ethereum/consensus-specs#3791
ethereum/execution-apis#549
ethereum/consensus-specs#3786

Other notes for review

@james-prysm james-prysm added Blocked Blocked by research or external factors Electra electra hardfork labels Jun 7, 2024
@james-prysm james-prysm requested review from prestonvanloon and a team as code owners June 7, 2024 19:30
@james-prysm james-prysm requested review from nalepae and rauljordan June 7, 2024 19:30
@@ -25,14 +25,14 @@ func RunExecutionLayerWithdrawalRequestTest(t *testing.T, config string) {
for _, folder := range testFolders {
t.Run(folder.Name(), func(t *testing.T) {
folderPath := path.Join(testsFolderPath, folder.Name())
executionLayerWithdrawalRequestFile, err := util.BazelFileBytes(folderPath, "execution_layer_withdrawal_request.ssz_snappy")
withdrawalRequestFile, err := util.BazelFileBytes(folderPath, "execution_layer_withdrawal_request.ssz_snappy")
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

spect test folder should be updated if renamed

@james-prysm james-prysm requested review from kasey and removed request for rauljordan June 7, 2024 19:49
@james-prysm james-prysm marked this pull request as draft June 7, 2024 21:11
@james-prysm james-prysm marked this pull request as ready for review June 11, 2024 16:52
@james-prysm james-prysm added Ready For Review A pull request ready for code review and removed Blocked Blocked by research or external factors labels Jun 11, 2024
@@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ tests/minimal/eip6110/ssz_static/ContributionAndProof
tests/minimal/eip6110/ssz_static/Deposit
tests/minimal/eip6110/ssz_static/DepositData
tests/minimal/eip6110/ssz_static/DepositMessage
tests/minimal/eip6110/ssz_static/DepositReceipt
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think you don't want to touch these exclusions until the spectests have been updated. Otherwise the spectest compliance report tool will complain these tests are missing

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

will add back in then

prestonvanloon
prestonvanloon previously approved these changes Jun 11, 2024
Copy link
Member

@prestonvanloon prestonvanloon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@james-prysm james-prysm enabled auto-merge June 12, 2024 13:41
@james-prysm james-prysm added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 12, 2024
Merged via the queue into develop with commit 3413d05 Jun 12, 2024
16 of 17 checks passed
@james-prysm james-prysm deleted the electra-execution-renames branch June 12, 2024 15:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Electra electra hardfork Ready For Review A pull request ready for code review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants