Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(run-protocol): complete permits for startRewardDistributor, makeAnchorAsset #5213

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Apr 25, 2022

Conversation

dckc
Copy link
Member

@dckc dckc commented Apr 25, 2022

closes: ##5212

Description / Security Considerations

When we wired up runStake to rewards, we neglected to update the permit of startRewardDistributor to give it access to the runStake creator facet.

Another incomplete permit that came up in testing ( #5062 (comment) ) was makeAnchorAsset. Since it uses mintHolder for the anchor asset, so it needs access the mintHolder installation and to zoe to start a copy of it.

Testing Considerations

These permits used to be tested by vats/test/test-boot.js but since we moved them to packages/run-protocol, they are no longer covered by tests that run in ci.

While these fixes have been tested manually ( #5062 (comment) ) ideally, this PR would include a regression test that runs in ci. Reviewers will please help judge whether it's expedient to proceed without such a test.

@dckc dckc requested a review from turadg as a code owner April 25, 2022 15:16
@dckc dckc force-pushed the 5212-permit-fix branch from 66252f2 to e0a6929 Compare April 25, 2022 15:22
@dckc dckc force-pushed the 5212-permit-fix branch from e0a6929 to 255e99f Compare April 25, 2022 15:45
@dckc
Copy link
Member Author

dckc commented Apr 25, 2022

Thanks for verifying that it works, @arirubinstein .

@michaelfig , @turadg , I'm still interested in feedback on the testing considerations above.

@turadg
Copy link
Member

turadg commented Apr 25, 2022

Reviewers will please help judge whether it's expedient to proceed without such a test.

Do we have a ticket for cleanups we've identified during this bootstrap? I would non-blocking request a) such a ticket and b) that testing this be included.

@dckc
Copy link
Member Author

dckc commented Apr 25, 2022

@turadg and I have plans to work toward such a test on Thu.

@dckc
Copy link
Member Author

dckc commented Apr 25, 2022

Reviewers will please help judge whether it's expedient to proceed without such a test.

Do we have a ticket for cleanups we've identified during this bootstrap? I would non-blocking request a) such a ticket and b) that testing this be included.

well, we have 1 now: #5217

Copy link
Member

@michaelfig michaelfig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@dckc dckc added the automerge:squash Automatically squash merge label Apr 25, 2022
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 2b2c966 into master Apr 25, 2022
@mergify mergify bot deleted the 5212-permit-fix branch April 25, 2022 20:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
automerge:squash Automatically squash merge
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants