Update chainlink-protos/cre/go version #1618
Conversation
|
👋 nadahalli, thanks for creating this pull request! To help reviewers, please consider creating future PRs as drafts first. This allows you to self-review and make any final changes before notifying the team. Once you're ready, you can mark it as "Ready for review" to request feedback. Thanks! |
✅ API Diff Results - No breaking changes |
…mon into confhttp3
nadahalli
had a problem deploying
to
integration
GitHub Actions
Failure
nadahalli
had a problem deploying
to
integration
GitHub Actions
Failure
product-security-plaid-production
bot
requested review from
ettec,
george-dorin and
ilija42
nadahalli
had a problem deploying
to
integration
GitHub Actions
Failure
nadahalli
had a problem deploying
to
integration
GitHub Actions
Failure
| const file_capabilities_internal_basictrigger_v1_basic_trigger_proto_rawDesc = "" + | ||
| "\n" + | ||
| "9capabilities/internal/basictrigger/v1/basic_trigger.proto\x12%capabilities.internal.basictrigger.v1\x1a)tools/generator/v1beta/cre_metadata.proto\"4\n" + | ||
| "9capabilities/internal/basictrigger/v1/basic_trigger.proto\x12%capabilities.internal.basictrigger.v1\x1a*tools/generator/v1alpha/cre_metadata.proto\"4\n" + |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
isn't beta -> alpha a downgrade?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems like it. But apparently, the beta upgrade was rolled back? I am really not sure about this. @MStreet3 should know the facts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also, this PR depends on a commit that is not a part of main yet. Waiting for smartcontractkit/chainlink-protos#218 to get merged.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
smartcontractkit/chainlink-protos#218 got merged, and I have used the updated version here. This is good for review now.
nadahalli
had a problem deploying
to
integration
GitHub Actions
Failure
nadahalli
had a problem deploying
to
integration
GitHub Actions
Failure
|
Please take another look. |
4 participants
Requires
Supports