Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes: #XXX
Description
Makes a separate AppKeepers struct, to avoid issues like the v6 upgrade from occuring. We store all Keepers as pointers, and separate out hook setting from them.
Moreover, by having the keepers be a separate struct, we can have upgrades take in AppKeepers directly without circular dependencies.
The main reason for a second struct in a different module is the upgrades module. Otherwise we could keep everything in the app.go, with this new method structure & local variable separation.
Thoughts on this approach / if its worth continuing as a separate module / struct, versus just separating initialization methods in app.go?
This is going to break many tests / require aliasing, which I'm now thinking may not be worth the more convenient upgrade logic.
For contributor use:
docs/
) or specification (x/<module>/spec/
)Unreleased
section inCHANGELOG.md
Files changed
in the Github PR explorer