Publish substrate-cli-test-utils to crates.io

[liamaharon]

Removes publish = false from substrate-cli-test-utils.

[bkchr]

Wait. This crate only contains two macros, do we really need to publish this? You can just copy these macros.

[Morganamilo]

I don't see any reason to not publish anything at all really. If its useful for us it could be useful for some one else.

[liamaharon]

Wait. This crate only contains two macros, do we really need to publish this? You can just copy these macros.

Yeah I was mistaken, I meant to publish substrate-cli-test-utils, not `substrate-test-utils. Updated the PR.

[liamaharon]

I've updated this PR to also rename node-executor to polkadot-node-executor (original name is taken) and set public to true on that crate too.

[bkchr]

Please revert your changes around releasing the node-cli stuff and the renaming etc!

In the test-utils you need to remove the start_node_inline function to not require these deps released. Next point would be start_node is expecting substrate-node. Either make the binary name an input to start_node or also remove this function.

[bkchr]

Don't do this. This crate should not be released!

[liamaharon]

Why not release it?

try-runtime-cli currently uses ExecutorDispatch from sc_executor.
edit: try-runtime-cli currently uses ExecutorDispatch from node_executor.

Maybe we should move try-runtime-cli into the monorepo as you suggested to avoid these headaches.. But it still seems that it is reasonable some projects may want to use these crates?

[bkchr]

sc-executor != node-executor. Node executor being the executor declaration for the Substrate node that is nothing that should be released.

[bkchr]

sc-executor is already released.

[bkchr]

Please revert your changes around releasing the node-cli stuff and the renaming etc!

In the test-utils you need to remove the start_node_inline function to not require these deps released. Next point would be start_node is expecting substrate-node. Either make the binary name an input to start_node or also remove this function.

@liamaharon this still holds. You need to remove node-cli and node-primitives.

[liamaharon]

@bkchr then what is the best practice then for starting a node programatically? Or is there a reason not to support that?

[bkchr]

It makes sense to run a node in a test. I'm not arguing against this. You can also use the current functions, but then you should make the binary name generic, by passing to the respective functions.

[bkchr]

@liamaharon what is the status of this?

[liamaharon]

@liamaharon what is the status of this?

I need to investigate the best alternative to using the dep in try-runtime-cli.

Will close the PR for now.