feat: add root gauges and refactor workflows #225
Conversation
|
|
Can we merge ecosystem balances first so I can review against that delta? |
|
all good points, no rush with merging this so will work on getting those changes in here |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a few more things to take alook at. Mostly just think about the process query stuff.
I think we can rethink the action scheduling in another PR.
Once you do nore more onceover, the last thing I want to od is run all available actions on this branch and make sure they all work right/render decent results. Once we merge we should run any new ones to also make sure they work.
| @@ -24,15 +24,13 @@ jobs: | |||
| git clone https://github.com/balancer/balancer-deployments.git | |||
| export DEPLOYMENTS_REPO_ROOT_URL=`pwd`/balancer-deployments | |||
| pip3 install -r bal_addresses/requirements.txt | |||
| python3 gen_core_pools.py | |||
| python3 gen_pools_and_gauges.py | |||
| python3 transform-deployments.py | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Transform deployments is the thing that generates addressbook.json, which is the thing that most people use.
It looks like you ru generate_addresses after each thing, but not transform_deployments.
Maybe in the end we need to just refactor gen_addresses and transform deployments. For now it's a bit strange to be running one and not the other.
Not sure if we should block this PR because of this, eveything will end up eventually consistent, but given the current setup it could take a couple weeks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hmm ok good point. i shuffled the workflows in 389d983 a bit:
generate_addressbooks.yaml: create jsons for pools, gauges, chains, and the mono addressbookgenerate_permissions.yaml: create permissions jsonsgenerate_core_pools.yaml: create core pools json
| @@ -70,9 +70,45 @@ def process_query_preferential_gauges(result) -> dict: | |||
| return df.set_index("symbol")["id"].to_dict() | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| def process_query_root_gauges(result, gauges) -> dict: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it make sense to move this kind of logic to the subgraphs object?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not really, this is very specific to the gen_pools_and_gauges.py workflow imo
closes #180
wip, currently only refactors the workflows