-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
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: send exn to actual recipient only #273
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #273 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 83.93% 83.93%
=======================================
Files 48 48
Lines 4257 4259 +2
Branches 1051 1038 -13
=======================================
+ Hits 3573 3575 +2
+ Misses 680 656 -24
- Partials 4 28 +24 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
ok seems to have broken 1 test, interesting.. checking edit - ok, yes, forgot i need remove this |
package-lock.json
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changes here for audit check on pipeline
@@ -78,24 +78,19 @@ export class Exchanges { | |||
payload: Dict<any>, | |||
embeds: Dict<any>, | |||
recipients: string[] | |||
): Promise<any> { | |||
for (const recipient of recipients) { | |||
): Promise<any[]> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we should get proper types here instead of any
- don't have capacity right now but will try to sweep things in coming weeks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hm, this actually now returns an array of Promise
. So more correct would be Promise<any>[]
.
However, a better option could be to change this method to have one recipient and adjust from the call site accordingly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
good point, it was right and i incorrectly refactored and TS didnt pick it up due to any - will fix.
But not so sure on changing the method to only have one recipient as this brings a lot of for loops at the call sites, which will make every wallet/app using multi-sig need to refactor everywhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
and i broke tests again - weird, seems adding the end role doesn't like these changes
exn messages have a specific recipient (
rp
field).Right now for multi-sig:
rp
field of first memberThis change will just send the specific message to the specific member, and not return early.