-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 91
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
chore: check core contracts storage changes on pr #789
chore: check core contracts storage changes on pr #789
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall works fine for the following checklist:
- success: new variable added to the end of a contract
- fail: new state variable introduced in the beginning or in the middle of a contract
- fail: order of state variables changed
- fail: type of state variable changed
- fail: existing state variable removed from the middle of a contract
- fail: existing state variable removed from the end of a contract
- fail: inheritance changed, ex:
contract MyContract is A,B != contract MyContract is B,A
- fail: new state variable added to the base contract
The https://github.com/Rubilmax/foundry-storage-check workflow throws a false positive when a new state variable is added to a base contract and the gap size is reduced but we can put up with it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There are some failing "Check For Core Contracts Storage Changes" CI runs but I guess we need to merge this PR first to make it run without errors. Anyway the "Check For Core Contracts Storage Changes" workflow works fine in my forked ubiquity-dollar repo.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have merged the whole thing to my forked branch, and I can replicate.
Working good
Yes. there is NO issue merging this in it's current stage, as it should pass everything when it's merged
My QA:
action running with no triggers
https://github.com/molecula451/ubiquity-dollar/actions/runs/6288841260
action running with trigger
https://github.com/molecula451/ubiquity-dollar/actions/runs/6288943288/job/17074938660
One thing: I will favor the deprecation warning by github about the "set-output" and fix it
[provide_contracts](https://github.com/molecula451/ubiquity-dollar/actions/runs/6288841260/job/17074756015#step:4:8)
The `set-output` command is deprecated and will be disabled soon. Please upgrade to using Environment Files. For more information see: https://github.blog/changelog/2022-10-11-github-actions-deprecating-save-state-and-set-output-commands/
@gitcoindev korba please rebase branch and update it |
GitHub UI allows me to directly merge the pull request. If you want I can do it for you |
Resolves: #775
This GitHub action checks pull requests for all core contracts storage changes.