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

updates network names in networks.json #866

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 5, 2024
Merged

Conversation

0xDEnYO
Copy link
Contributor

@0xDEnYO 0xDEnYO commented Nov 21, 2024

Which Jira task belongs to this PR?

Why did I implement it this way?

Checklist before requesting a review

  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • This pull request is as small as possible and only tackles one problem
  • I have added tests that cover the functionality / test the bug
  • I have updated any required documentation

Checklist for reviewer (DO NOT DEPLOY and contracts BEFORE CHECKING THIS!!!)

  • I have checked that any arbitrary calls to external contracts are validated and or restricted
  • I have checked that any privileged calls (i.e. storage modifications) are validated and or restricted
  • I have ensured that any new contracts have had AT A MINIMUM 1 preliminary audit conducted on by <company/auditor>

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 21, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the config/networks.json file by changing the name fields for various blockchain networks from their full names to lowercase identifiers. This includes numerous entries such as "Ethereum Mainnet" to "mainnet" and "Arbitrum One" to "arbitrum". The overall structure of the JSON file remains unchanged, retaining all other fields.

Changes

File Change Summary
config/networks.json Updated name fields for multiple blockchain networks to lowercase identifiers.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

AuditNotRequired

Suggested reviewers

  • ezynda3

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@lifi-action-bot lifi-action-bot marked this pull request as draft November 21, 2024 02:50
@0xDEnYO 0xDEnYO marked this pull request as ready for review November 21, 2024 02:51
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
config/networks.json (1)

Line range hint 168-172: Consider standardizing URL formats.

There are inconsistencies in URL formatting:

Consider standardizing the URL format to prevent potential URL concatenation issues.

Also applies to: 489-503

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between df1c843 and bbcc702.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • config/networks.json (34 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
config/networks.json (3)

3-3: LGTM! Network name standardization is consistent.

The network names have been standardized to lowercase identifiers consistently across all networks, which improves maintainability and reduces the chance of case-sensitivity issues.

Also applies to: 21-21, 39-39, 57-57, 75-75, 93-93, 111-111, 129-129, 147-147, 165-165, 183-183, 201-201, 219-219, 237-237, 255-255, 273-273, 291-291, 309-309, 327-327, 345-345, 363-363, 381-381, 399-399, 417-417, 435-435, 453-453, 471-471, 489-489, 507-507, 525-525, 543-543, 561-561, 579-579, 597-597


Line range hint 1-612: Security configurations look good.

  • All production network RPC URLs properly use HTTPS
  • Inactive networks are clearly marked with "status": "inactive"
  • Local test network appropriately uses HTTP for localhost

Line range hint 435-450: Verify empty configuration values for inactive networks.

Some networks have empty configuration values:

  • opbnb: Missing explorerApiUrl and safeApiUrl
  • localanvil: Multiple empty values (expected for local test network)

Please confirm if these empty values are intentional.

Also applies to: 597-612

✅ Verification successful

Empty configuration values are intentional for inactive networks

The empty configuration values are consistent with the network status:

  • Both networks with empty values (opbnb and localanvil) are marked as inactive
  • localanvil is a local test network where empty values are expected
  • Empty API URLs for inactive networks is a common pattern as these endpoints aren't needed
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any other network configurations with empty values

# Search for empty string values in the JSON
jq -r 'to_entries[] | select((.value | to_entries[] | select(.value == "")) != null) | .key' config/networks.json

Length of output: 193


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the status of networks with empty values and their specific empty fields
jq -r '.[] | select((.explorerApiUrl == "" or .safeApiUrl == "")) | {name, status, explorerApiUrl, safeApiUrl}' config/networks.json

Length of output: 319

@lifi-action-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Test Coverage Report

Line Coverage: 76.10% (1675 / 2201 lines)
Function Coverage: 82.78% ( 351 / 424 functions)
Branch Coverage: 35.62% ( 192 / 539 branches)
Test coverage (76.10%) is above min threshold (76%). Check passed.

@0xDEnYO 0xDEnYO enabled auto-merge (squash) November 21, 2024 03:13
@0xDEnYO 0xDEnYO merged commit 69a711a into main Dec 5, 2024
23 of 24 checks passed
@0xDEnYO 0xDEnYO deleted the update-network-names branch December 5, 2024 10:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants