Store IBC trace when minting #3319
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3319 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 53.89% 53.71% -0.18%
==========================================
Files 314 314
Lines 105704 105561 -143
==========================================
- Hits 56968 56702 -266
- Misses 48736 48859 +123 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| impl TryFrom<Event> for IbcEvent { | ||
| type Error = EventError; | ||
|
|
||
| fn try_from(namada_event: Event) -> std::result::Result<Self, Self::Error> { | ||
| Ok(Self { | ||
| event_type: validate_ibc_event_type(&namada_event)?, | ||
| attributes: { | ||
| let mut attrs: HashMap<_, _> = | ||
| namada_event.into_attributes().into_iter().collect(); | ||
| attrs.with_attribute(event_domain_of::<Self>()); | ||
| attrs | ||
| }, | ||
| }) | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this could have still been useful, but not to the ledger codebase directly. it could be useful as sdk library code for users to consume. maybe this can be restored in the future, with proper event type validation
| owner: &Address, | ||
| coin: &PrefixedCoin, | ||
| ) -> Result<(), TokenTransferError> { | ||
| if coin.denom.trace_path.is_empty() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why would we call the function in this case, though? If we must do it like this, we should call the function maybe_store_ibc_denom or something, since it sometimes doesn't store anything at all.
* yuji/store-ibc-trace: fix func name add changelog new is_receiving_success store ibc traces when minting
* origin/yuji/store-ibc-trace: fix func name add changelog new is_receiving_success store ibc traces when minting
Describe your changes
closes #3317, closes #3229
Also,
get_ibc_eventsand IBC event conversion functionsis_receiving_successwithout checking eventsIndicate on which release or other PRs this topic is based on
v0.37.0Checklist before merging to
draft