Skip to content

Conversation

@drelu
Copy link
Contributor

@drelu drelu commented Jan 13, 2019

What was wrong?

Related to Issue #1203

How was it fixed?

Added function addReservedPeer to parity module

Copy link
Collaborator

@kclowes kclowes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me so far! Do you mind testing this?

@drelu
Copy link
Contributor Author

drelu commented Jan 14, 2019

I have tested it in a private Parity cluster for both a positive and negative case and can confirm that it is working.

@kclowes
Copy link
Collaborator

kclowes commented Jan 14, 2019

Sorry, my comment was unclear. I meant, will you please add a test (or however many tests you feel are warranted :) ) to the codebase? I think here is where it should live. Thanks!

njgheorghita and others added 6 commits January 22, 2019 16:02
Exceptions generated by eth-abi are fairly descriptive.  It seems a bit
redundant to wrap encoding exceptions with this extra message and also
filter out the original exception type.
@drelu
Copy link
Contributor Author

drelu commented Jan 27, 2019

Sorry, my comment was unclear. I meant, will you please add a test (or however many tests you feel are warranted :) ) to the codebase? I think here is where it should live. Thanks!

I added the test. However, the RPC Parity backend does not have the addReservedPeer method. Is this a local parity node or mockup the tests are running against? If yes, can you point me to the file, please?

@kclowes
Copy link
Collaborator

kclowes commented Jan 31, 2019

That is a good question. @pipermerriam do you know the answer^?

Improvements to `merge_args_and_kwargs`
@pipermerriam
Copy link
Member

Probably need to update the version of parity we are testing against:

I won't be surprised if the parity fixtures also end up needing to be updated if parity has upgraded it's database schema (which I think it did recently)

@drelu
Copy link
Contributor Author

drelu commented Feb 21, 2019

@pipermerriam Thanks! I do not know the Web3.py CI system. Can you help me upgrading it to Parity 2.3.x stable? I think it make sense to do so as more and more users started to use Parity. A better support from web3.py would be a good thing to have.

@kclowes
Copy link
Collaborator

kclowes commented Feb 21, 2019

I can! Thanks @drelu! I'll wrap this one up

@kclowes
Copy link
Collaborator

kclowes commented Apr 8, 2019

This functionality was merged in #1311. Thanks @drelu!

@kclowes kclowes closed this Apr 8, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants