Add getCapabilities to the CapabilityRegistry #13031
Conversation
…stry-get-capabilities # Conflicts: # core/gethwrappers/keystone/generated/keystone_capability_registry/keystone_capability_registry.go # core/gethwrappers/keystone/generation/generated-wrapper-dependency-versions-do-not-edit.txt
DeividasK
requested review from
archseer,
bolekk,
patrick-dowell and
a team
as code owners
| @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: file name inconsistent with the name of the test and the other file
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 will fix it in a follow-up to avoid merge conflict.
| @@ -10,4 +10,8 @@ contract CapabilityConfigurationContract is ICapabilityConfiguration, ERC165 { | |||
| function getCapabilityConfiguration(uint256 donId) external view returns (bytes memory configuration) { | |||
| return s_donConfiguration[donId]; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| function supportsInterface(bytes4 interfaceId) public pure override returns (bool) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't see this used anywhere, why is it needed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is called by consumers/callers of this contract. My guess is the capability registry will call this prior to adding a particular configuration contract address to check that it supports the interface.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is used here: https://github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink/pull/13031/files#diff-d94c1796b3544ef8780af7e16b5361c8fb9e4d63f492faeda6a3362a8363f51bR180-R182 (previous implementation and test weren't working as expected).
|
github-merge-queue
bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks
No description provided.