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

UtxoId changes #114

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 18, 2022
Merged

UtxoId changes #114

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 18, 2022

Conversation

rakita
Copy link
Contributor

@rakita rakita commented Jan 5, 2022

changes for UtxoId: FuelLabs/fuel-tx#53

@rakita rakita self-assigned this Jan 9, 2022
@adlerjohn
Copy link
Contributor

Is this good to go?

@rakita
Copy link
Contributor Author

rakita commented Jan 13, 2022

It is still not good to go, i want to check some more small things, and want to Brandon to look at it so that he is familiar with it, it is more impactful than fuel-vm.

@rakita rakita marked this pull request as ready for review January 14, 2022 11:04
@@ -1510,9 +1510,9 @@ dependencies = [
"env_logger",
"fuel-asm",
"fuel-storage",
"fuel-tx",
"fuel-tx 0.1.0",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it seems like we're getting mismatched versions of fuel-tx somehow

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Probably some library that uses fuel-tx or fuel-vm is not updated, will check.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

fueltx_01

It is used by example project simple-wasm that imports fuels-abigen-macro->forc->fuel-gql-client.
To to do the update, we need to merge fuel-gql-client and update version to forc/fuel-abigen-macro

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Given how messy this is, and how the example project is more of an integration thing, should it simply be removed from the workspace?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@rakita rakita Jan 18, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems reasonable to be removed or moved to somewhere else if still needed (not sure where).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Contributor

@adlerjohn adlerjohn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes to the lockfile can be clobbered in #140.

@rakita rakita merged commit 82bfb4d into master Jan 18, 2022
@rakita rakita deleted the utxo_id branch January 18, 2022 16:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants