You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is not brainstorming ideas. If you have an idea you'd like to discuss, please open a new discussion on the lotus forum and select the category as Ideas.
I have a specific, actionable, and well motivated feature request to propose.
Lotus component
lotus daemon - chain sync
lotus fvm/fevm - Lotus FVM and FEVM interactions
lotus miner/worker - sealing
lotus miner - proving(WindowPoSt/WinningPoSt)
lotus JSON-RPC API
lotus message management (mpool)
Other
What is the motivation behind this feature request? Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Be able to execute the same paths CI runs but locally if you have the resources to do so.
Describe the solution you'd like
We now have make unittests to run everything but itests, we should have a make itests to do the itests. I'm not sure if a make test is a good idea though, we don't really want to give the impression this is a good idea for any contributor to run (maybe it could print documentation though).
Currently itests are each run separately, and they are configured independently in the CI config. It would not be ideal to have yet another place to have to remember to add your new itest to make it run, so some deduplication is needed. Either the Makefile target reads CI config (new GitHub Actions one) to figure out what and how to run, or we make CI config and Makefile depend on some new configuration, perhaps a text file in the itests directory, or perhaps we decorate itests in source and extract metadata from there.
Describe alternatives you've considered
No response
Additional context
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Checklist
Ideas
.Lotus component
What is the motivation behind this feature request? Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Be able to execute the same paths CI runs but locally if you have the resources to do so.
Describe the solution you'd like
We now have
make unittests
to run everything but itests, we should have amake itests
to do the itests. I'm not sure if amake test
is a good idea though, we don't really want to give the impression this is a good idea for any contributor to run (maybe it could print documentation though).Currently itests are each run separately, and they are configured independently in the CI config. It would not be ideal to have yet another place to have to remember to add your new itest to make it run, so some deduplication is needed. Either the Makefile target reads CI config (new GitHub Actions one) to figure out what and how to run, or we make CI config and Makefile depend on some new configuration, perhaps a text file in the itests directory, or perhaps we decorate itests in source and extract metadata from there.
Describe alternatives you've considered
No response
Additional context
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: