feat: Release 0.18.0 with transaction receipt on contract invocations #103
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
* new e2e test + backend updates * add changes from openapi spec for transaction receipt * remove cache dependencies install for unit tests
✅ Heimdall Review Status
|
* update changelog * bumped up version
jazz-cb
approved these changes
Feb 13, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changed? Why?
This change will add transaction receipts to contract invocations. After invoking a contract method, this new change will fetch the transaction receipt of the completed transaction and append the receipt contents, within the "content" field of the Transaction model for the Contract Invocation.
Qualified Impact
If there is any issue with this change, the best measure would be to rollback and then fix the error accordingly. This change will affect the content field which is a part of the Transaction model for the Contract Invocation, but there shouldn't be any issues with the structure of model. Even with the strict validation, we will have the required "to" and "from" fields.