-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 607
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: CLI account-locked-duration #1292
Conversation
This was based off of v7.0.2, I can re-base this off of main if needed. |
…equest, and Response
…eratorDuration method.
Please do rebase the change off of main |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1292 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 19.82% 19.74% -0.08%
==========================================
Files 202 202
Lines 27685 27759 +74
==========================================
- Hits 5489 5482 -7
- Misses 21175 21256 +81
Partials 1021 1021
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@ValarDragon I had rebased off main after that comment starting with commit 93fd8c3, were you wanting to remerge main based on new commits since then? Also I refixed the typo that somehow got reversed during the rebase so a rerun of workflows should satisfy the linter. |
rpc AccountLockedDuration(AccountLockedDurationRequest) | ||
returns (AccountLockedDurationResponse) { | ||
option (google.api.http).get = | ||
"/osmosis/lockup/v1beta1/account_locked_duration/{owner}"; |
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.
Since AccountLockedDurationRequest
defines the query params, is there a point in having {owner}
as part of the resource URL?
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.
Can you elaborate on this? AccountLockedPastTimeDenom
, AccountLockedPastTimeNotUnlockingOnlyRequest
, and most of the locked RPC commands have the {owner} within the resource URL, I had assumed it was for the address parameter and maintained practice.
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.
@alexanderbez I'm not very familiar with this RPC library - does it make sense for us to create an issue and remove potentially redundant {owner}
?
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.
These urls are mostly used in front end, but we definitely don't need to have them both in the request url and the request itself. However, I don't know if it's worth changing considering the fact that all the urls and queries in the frontend would have to be updated along as well
Co-authored-by: Roman <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Roman <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Roman <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Roman <[email protected]>
The ticket changed a little due to jitter no longer being an issue and yes I planned todo the same command but for denoms after this one. Rather than do both of them at once I wanted to see the process etc for making a change and what kinds of feedback you would have, and better understand things as a whole, rather than making the same mistakes twice and having to fix them twice in separate PRs. tl;dr |
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.
Seems that there's linting issues in query.go
thats making the checks fail.
LGTM once that's been fixed!
Thanks @mattverse Will get this fixed today, oddly enough it doesn't seem to be related to this ticket. |
@mattverse Ended up fixing it now, |
@alexanderbez I made the changes you requested. |
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.
Please address the remaining minor comments but otherwise LGTM. Great job!
rpc AccountLockedDuration(AccountLockedDurationRequest) | ||
returns (AccountLockedDurationResponse) { | ||
option (google.api.http).get = | ||
"/osmosis/lockup/v1beta1/account_locked_duration/{owner}"; |
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.
@alexanderbez I'm not very familiar with this RPC library - does it make sense for us to create an issue and remove potentially redundant {owner}
?
@p0mvn Requested changes done. |
Closes: #756
Description
Adds CLI command to query pool lockups with given duration. The jitter issue outlined in #756 no longer applies due to +2 weeks (longest lockup time) passing since v7 has been out.
Example Usage:
For contributor use:
docs/
) or specification (x/<module>/spec/
)Unreleased
section inCHANGELOG.md
Files changed
in the Github PR explorer