Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
chore(deps): upgrade polkadot to 0.9.43 (#4106)
Removed code to be removed (assets transaction router, lending, dutch auciton, liquidations, vault, bonded finance, currency-factory) instead of fixing. Migrate to XCM ICA from ORML. Replaced removed crypto with what I have found https://substrate.stackexchange.com/questions/9754/sp-iocrypto-was-removed-amid-polkadot-0-9-39-and-0-9-43-what-is-replacement Fixed assets after migration (changed how ops work again ED - #4107). Only one test fails - seems something fucked up in Parity burn/slash. Need research and may be report bug. Oracle, farming, pablo, rewards migrated with disabled tests and benchmarks. Same for TX (need to update to latest Parity version instead of stale CP paste). Migrated CW. Seems @kkast migrated oracle, pablo, rewards, farming. Fixed runtime and node (enabled warp), fixed wasm and benches builds, updated zombienet respecting updated parameters. Disable IBC benches until fixes (using old benches - which should be almost same as if to rerun). @kkast would be awesome if you can fix look at cumulus/substrate/polkadot/orml release notes and apply migration we need from 39 to 43 version. Ensure assets are correct, 1 asset test asserts.. Required for merge: - [ ] `pr-workflow-check / draft-release-check` is ✅ success ComposableFi/composable-ibc#397 (comment) - Other rules GitHub shows you, or can be read in [configuration](../terraform/github.com/branches.tf) Makes review faster: - [x] PR title is my best effort to provide summary of changes and has clear text to be part of release notes - [x] I marked PR by `misc` label if it should not be in release notes - [x] Linked Zenhub/Github/Slack/etc reference if one exists #4093 ComposableFi/composable-ibc#397 - [x] I was clear on what type of deployment required to release my changes (node, runtime, contract, indexer, on chain operation, frontend, infrastructure) if any in PR title or description - [x] Added reviewer into `Reviewers` - [x] I tagged(`@`) or used other form of notification of one person who I think can handle best review of this PR - [ ] I have proved that PR has no general regressions of relevant features and processes required to release into production - [ ] Any dependency updates made, was done according guides from relevant dependency - Clicking all checkboxes - Adding detailed description of changes when it feels appropriate (for example when PR is big)
- Loading branch information