Upgrade to cosmos-sdk v0.44 #678
Conversation
|
I just realized that there is already a PR for this in #656, and I think that's actually farther along in the process than I am. Should probably work off of that. |
|
Hi Sunny, there are a lot of talks about this upgrade in the issue and on discord. Not sure if everything is written down. In any case, there are at least 3 known forks that add 0.44 support. It is unclear all the design decisions/tradeoffs each one makes. But I think there is no need for another one. The best way to help move this forward is to reach out to @alpe and maybe offer a review of some code. BTW, the biggest open question I think is with the 0.44 upgrade whether contracts should maintain 20 bytes "legacy" addresses like secp256k1, or use the new 32 byte "module account" address format. |
|
We have communicated putting this into our 1.0 roadmap and will get started on it in a week or two. |
|
Got it! I'm gonna close this PR for now then. Btw, I would say I have a preference for the new 32 byte addresses, but I wonder if we do need to provide legacy support for old addresses? |
|
9282758#commitcomment-61521105 Functionally speaking I am pretty good with the beta2-ibc2 branch at notional-labs/wasmd but..... It would be hell to merge in and out (think like osmosis fork of cosmos sdk) So I am going to basically re-do your work here, using it as a template of sorts. I've also put together a whooooole bunch of tests and I hope to conclude with some kind of contract sanity test. Cheers! |
closes #501