Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 30, 2021. It is now read-only.

Add API for compatible query of two types of transactions #683

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Jan 11, 2021

Conversation

summerpro
Copy link
Contributor

Closes: #630

Description


For contributor use:

  • Targeted PR against correct branch (see CONTRIBUTING.md)
  • Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.
  • Code follows the module structure standards.
  • Wrote unit and integration tests
  • Updated relevant documentation (docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/)
  • Added relevant godoc comments.
  • Added a relevant changelog entry to the Unreleased section in CHANGELOG.md
  • Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer

For admin use:

  • Added appropriate labels to PR (ex. WIP, R4R, docs, etc)
  • Reviewers assigned
  • Squashed all commits, uses message "Merge pull request #XYZ: [title]" (coding standards)

Copy link
Contributor

@fedekunze fedekunze 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! See the first comment for another proposed approach

x/evm/client/rest/rest.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
x/evm/client/rest/rest.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rpc/config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@summerpro summerpro requested a review from fedekunze December 31, 2020 16:34
@summerpro
Copy link
Contributor Author

why deploy contract test failed ?

@summerpro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fedekunze Can this pr be merged?

Copy link
Contributor

@fedekunze fedekunze left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

untested ACK

@fedekunze fedekunze merged commit 9ecd264 into cosmos:development Jan 11, 2021
@araskachoi
Copy link
Contributor

What was this supposed to fix? I'm thinking that this was a way to interpret the EthereumTxMsg that was generated from a transaction using RPC when querying the tx hash using curl localhost:8545/txs/{HASH}...?
If so, I have just tried doing this and it still gives the parsing err (internal error: tx {HASH} not found). This is probably related to #630 and may require a better way of decoding the amino msg or removing the EtheremintMsg altogether.
Can we discuss? Thanks!

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Failed to query "transaction sent by MetaMask" through transaction hash
3 participants