-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
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
feat: prepare RILT spec #582
Conversation
"Argument group name must be unique" fixes https://github.com/KILTprotocol/ticket/issues/3027
* make spiritnet & peregrine look similar * update script to build RILT spec
@@ -79,15 +79,15 @@ fn load_spec(id: &str) -> std::result::Result<Box<dyn sc_service::ChainSpec>, St | |||
log::info!("The following runtime was chosen based on the spec id: {}", runtime); | |||
|
|||
match (id, runtime) { | |||
("dev", _) => Ok(Box::new(chain_spec::peregrine::make_dev_spec()?)), | |||
("dev", _) => Ok(Box::new(chain_spec::peregrine::get_chain_spec_dev()?)), |
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 guess adding peregrine
somewhere in the name of the function would make it less confusing.
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.
Would it not make more sense to have a file in the chain_spec
folder for each runtime? From my point of view, it would make it cleaner and easier to follow. Just an idea.
@Ad96el We have a file for each runtime. There are only two runtimes, Spiritnet and Peregrine. You probably mean for each runtime configuration. That would make sense. |
Ah yes, thank you for pointing that out. |
fixes https://github.com/KILTprotocol/ticket/issues/2522
Metadata Diff to Develop Branch
Peregrine Diff
Spiritnet Diff
Checklist:
array[3]
useget(3)
, ...)