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

Enable state migration on emulator #3063

Closed
SupunS opened this issue Jan 31, 2024 · 5 comments · Fixed by onflow/flow-emulator#557
Closed

Enable state migration on emulator #3063

SupunS opened this issue Jan 31, 2024 · 5 comments · Fixed by onflow/flow-emulator#557
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@SupunS
Copy link
Member

SupunS commented Jan 31, 2024

Issue to be solved

Add a mechanism for developers to run the state migration on the emulator state. Then could combine it with the contract update on emulator (#2947) to test the end to end flow. Objective is to allow developers to:

  • Use an old state with a Cadence 1.0 emulator
  • Update your contracts to cadence 1.0
  • Run the migration using some tool (<- this is what this issue is proposing)
  • Start using the emulator with cadence 1.0 contracts + data

Suggested Solution

Draft PR: onflow/flow-emulator#557

@SupunS SupunS added the Feature label Jan 31, 2024
@SupunS
Copy link
Member Author

SupunS commented Jan 31, 2024

Draft PR: onflow/flow-emulator#557

Need to:

@turbolent
Copy link
Member

Nice! Re: onflow/flow-emulator@supun: storage/migration/cadence_values_migration.go looks familiar, is this from flow-go? Can we maybe re-use the code from there?

@SupunS
Copy link
Member Author

SupunS commented Feb 2, 2024

Yeah, it is similar, but needed some modifications, so copied it over there to make it easier to do the modifications at the time. Cleaned it up: onflow/flow-emulator#557

@SupunS
Copy link
Member Author

SupunS commented Feb 2, 2024

I've also added the migration for system contracts. However, the value migration still fails because it fails to find the Burner contract: https://discord.com/channels/613813861610684416/1202379720776495134/1202766352956391475

@SupunS
Copy link
Member Author

SupunS commented Feb 2, 2024

Came across this while testing: #3068. Not sure if this is an issue or the expected behaviour. Probably need further investigation/discussion

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants