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

op-server: bump celestia-openrpc to v0.3.0 #232

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 3, 2023

Conversation

tuxcanfly
Copy link
Collaborator

@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly commented Oct 29, 2023

Overview

This PR upgrades celestia-openrpc to v0.3.0 so that it is compatible with celestia-node v0.11.0.

While here, also update the testnet script for mocha-4.

Resolves #233

Checklist

  • New and updated code has appropriate documentation
  • New and updated code has new and/or updated testing
  • Required CI checks are passing
  • Visual proof for any user facing features like CLI or documentation updates
  • Linked issues closed with keywords

@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly force-pushed the tux/upgrade-node-v0.11.0 branch 5 times, most recently from 46af593 to f74bebb Compare October 29, 2023 05:05
@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly force-pushed the tux/upgrade-node-v0.11.0 branch from f74bebb to 3628f31 Compare October 29, 2023 07:00
@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly marked this pull request as ready for review October 29, 2023 07:01
@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly requested review from MSevey and jcstein October 29, 2023 07:01
Copy link
Member

@MSevey MSevey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm, what's the main reason to move to mocha over staying with arabica? Wouldn't it make sense to be on arabica-10?

@tuxcanfly
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I wanted to test for a partner who is running against mocha. We could maintain the testnet setup for both arabica and mocha. I'll test arabica and push it's update as well 👍🏽

@jcstein
Copy link
Member

jcstein commented Oct 31, 2023

hmm, should we use mocha as default as it is the closest to a "production" environment?

Copy link
Member

@jcstein jcstein left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK - I will need to sync (async is okay) with you to update the docs for this after merged and released

@jcstein
Copy link
Member

jcstein commented Oct 31, 2023

does this also close these issues @tuxcanfly ?

#234
#235

@jcstein
Copy link
Member

jcstein commented Nov 1, 2023

I think it would be good to bump this to the latest version of celestia-node & local-celestia-devnet v0.12.0

* fix: testnet-up

* Update docker-compose-testnet.yml
@tuxcanfly
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jcstein Yeah this fixes #235 will check about #234

@jcstein
Copy link
Member

jcstein commented Nov 1, 2023

alternatively, maybe it would make more sense to ship this and then upgrade in a subsequent pr. not sure what is best

antonio-altr pushed a commit to alt-research/optimism-celestia that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2023
antonio-altr added a commit to alt-research/optimism-celestia that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2023
@tuxcanfly
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Going ahead with merging this as it's blocking integration with celestia-node v0.11.0

@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly merged commit 006f891 into celestia-develop Nov 3, 2023
2 checks passed
@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly deleted the tux/upgrade-node-v0.11.0 branch November 3, 2023 06:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Incorrect setting of CELESTIA_NODE_AUTH_TOKEN in devnet-up.sh
4 participants