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

Make MercuryProvider extend PluginProvider #165

Closed

Conversation

cedric-cordenier
Copy link
Contributor

@cedric-cordenier cedric-cordenier commented Sep 4, 2023

We want to replace the New<Product>Provider methods in the relayer interface with a single, polymorphic NewPluginProvider method which extends a common PluginProvider interface exposing the three OCR components required to set up an Oracle.

At the moment the MedianProvider and FunctionsProvider both extend this interface, but Mercury does not since it extends the OCR ContractTransmitter with a few additional methods.

This modifies Mercury's interface by splitting this transmitter into two separate components, once which implements ocrtypes.ContractTransmitter and another which encompasses the additional methods (and implements mercury.MercuryServerFetcher). This is a largely cosmetic change, since under the hood the transmitter can remain the same struct, just exposed in two different methods.

@cedric-cordenier cedric-cordenier temporarily deployed to integration September 4, 2023 12:15 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@cedric-cordenier cedric-cordenier temporarily deployed to integration September 4, 2023 12:15 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@cedric-cordenier cedric-cordenier marked this pull request as ready for review September 4, 2023 12:21
@jmank88
Copy link
Collaborator

jmank88 commented Sep 4, 2023

Can you please open the corresponding /chainlink PR too (pointing at this branch)? Then we can see it all build together, and there no delay between merges.

@cedric-cordenier
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jmank88 Sure! You can find it here: smartcontractkit/chainlink#10467

@cedric-cordenier
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this in favour of #164 which folds these changes in.

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.

2 participants