Daily Smoketests #1287
Daily Smoketests #1287
Conversation
|
@yrong This should work for running smoketests daily. To see if the tests pass, I used our polkadot-sdk fork. I think we should be using paritytech/polkadot-sdk branches https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/tree/release-crates-io-v1.7.0 (currently in production) and https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/tree/release-crates-io-v1.14.0 (being upgraded to in https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/1143). Neither of those branches have the Westend config. Perhaps we can add it? |
|
For westend I'll just run some smoke tests(maybe only a subset) against the live network(not the local setup). That's why I initialized light client on Westend in #1286. I think it should be fine run current smoke tests against another network. Just need some change to make sure envs point to the config on westend. Updates: #1291 FYI. |
| - uses: actions/checkout@v2 | ||
| with: | ||
| # repository: paritytech/polkadot-sdk | ||
| # ref: release-crates-io-v1.7.0 # TODO change back to this branch once Westend code is merged upstream | ||
| repository: Snowfork/polkadot-sdk | ||
| ref: snowbridge | ||
| path: ./polkadot-sdk |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we just run tests against master branch of paritytech/polkadot-sdk?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could, but it would be best to run against the branch that is in production. The reason for this is to catch imminent production changes. For example, the checked hash extension change was merged into master, which we knew, but it was also merged into the production branch, which caught us off-guard.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
run against the branch that is in production.
Or run against the next/upcoming release for production? I would assume there is no need to test the current release which should definitely work?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The current release changes all the time as changes are merged in (fixes/backported features). So it is definitely needed to run against the current production release branch.
Sure, makes sense. I think we should have this PR as well, for the reason explained in #1287 (comment). |
Resolves: SNO-1080