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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

pkg/cosmos/client: upgrade from common/pkg/fee to framework/chains/fees #427

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 30, 2025
Merged

pkg/cosmos/client: upgrade from common/pkg/fee to framework/chains/fees #427

merged 3 commits into from
Jan 30, 2025
+63 −53

Conversation

jmank88
Copy link
Contributor

@jmank88 jmank88 commented Jan 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

This was the last remaining usage of the chainlink-common version of this package. After this, it can be removed:

@jmank88 jmank88 mentioned this pull request Jan 29, 2025
Merged
@jmank88 jmank88 marked this pull request as ready for review January 29, 2025 12:17
@cl-sonarqube-production
Copy link

Quality Gate failed Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
0.0% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 75%)

See analysis details on SonarQube

ilija42
ilija42 previously approved these changes Jan 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
@jmank88
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmank88 commented Jan 29, 2025

Huh, why is the linter flagging files I didn't touch?

@jmank88
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmank88 commented Jan 29, 2025

Huh, why is the linter flagging files I didn't touch?

Maybe cause it is triggered on push? Updated to pull_request

pavel-raykov
pavel-raykov previously approved these changes Jan 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
@jmank88 jmank88 requested a review from ilija42 January 29, 2025 13:42
ilija42
ilija42 previously approved these changes Jan 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
@jmank88
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmank88 commented Jan 29, 2025

Well the linter is fixed, but now I am seeing plugin provider is not supported for cosmos in the integration tests 🤔 I wonder if I broke something in my last set of changes that was adapting this method?

@jmank88 jmank88 dismissed stale reviews from ilija42 and pavel-raykov via 62bf7d5 January 29, 2025 14:23
pavel-raykov
pavel-raykov previously approved these changes Jan 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
@jmank88
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmank88 commented Jan 29, 2025

Updating the chainlink version did not help 🤔

ilija42
ilija42 previously approved these changes Jan 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
@jmank88
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmank88 commented Jan 29, 2025

Ah this should do it:

@jmank88 jmank88 dismissed stale reviews from ilija42 and pavel-raykov via 0f599bb January 30, 2025 12:19
@jmank88
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmank88 commented Jan 30, 2025

This is green now

@jmank88 jmank88 requested a review from ilija42 January 30, 2025 12:41
@jmank88 jmank88 requested a review from pavel-raykov January 30, 2025 12:41
@jmank88 jmank88 merged commit 3df261e into develop Jan 30, 2025
16 of 17 checks passed
@jmank88 jmank88 deleted the rm-pkg-fee branch January 30, 2025 12:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ilija42 ilija42 ilija42 approved these changes

@cfal cfal Awaiting requested review from cfal

@DylanTinianov DylanTinianov Awaiting requested review from DylanTinianov

@pavel-raykov pavel-raykov Awaiting requested review from pavel-raykov

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@jmank88 @ilija42 @pavel-raykov