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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Gateway and CoGateway should be Organized. #486

Closed
deepesh-kn opened this issue Nov 29, 2018 · 0 comments
Closed

Gateway and CoGateway should be Organized. #486

deepesh-kn opened this issue Nov 29, 2018 · 0 comments

Comments

@deepesh-kn
Copy link
Contributor

  • Gateway and CoGateway should be organised contracts.
  • Remove the organisation address from the following contract constructors.
    • GatewayBase
    • Gateway
    • CoGateway
    • EIP20Gateway
    • EIP20CoGateway
  • Remove the organisation variable from GatewayBase.
  • Write/Update the constructors.js tests for all the above contracts and also the modified functions.
@schemar schemar self-assigned this Dec 4, 2018
schemar added a commit to schemar/mosaic-contracts that referenced this issue Dec 4, 2018
@schemar
Gateways are now organized
c96455e 
I made the `GatewayBase` organized. As a result, the contracts that
directly or indirectly extend the `GatewayBase` must now provide an
address of a worker manager contract that implements the interface
`IsWorkerInterface`. All relevant modifiers were replaced by
`onlyWorker`.

Tests were updated to reflect the change. In order to easily test
organized contracts, I created a `MockWorkerManager` that can be used in
tests and has a single valid worker address.

I also re-organized the `contracts/test` directory a little bit with
additional sub-directories.

Fixes OpenST#486
@schemar schemar mentioned this issue Dec 4, 2018
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@schemar @benjaminbollen @deepesh-kn