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.

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

Customize name, id, and protocolId in parachain specs #1518

Open
JoshOrndorff opened this issue Nov 16, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Customize name, id, and protocolId in parachain specs #1518

JoshOrndorff opened this issue Nov 16, 2023 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers question Further information is requested

Comments

@JoshOrndorff
Copy link

Currently Zombienet does not customize the name, id, or protocolId for the parachains that it launches. That means they all end up with the exact same defaults like "local testnet" and similar.

In parachains based on the node template, zombienet does change the consensus authorities which manages to make the individual specs unique enough to not collide. But it is not guaranteed that all chains will use this configuration. Any chain that uses Nimbus, PoW, or Tuxedo, parachain_staking, etc, for example will not have the aura fields.

So I recommend also customizing the chain specs (both plain and raw) with meaningful names and ids. For example maybe they could be set to "2000-rococo-local-plain", "2001-rococo-local-plain", ..., "2000-rococo-local-raw", ...

@pepoviola
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @JoshOrndorff, wdyt of using this (parachain-name could not be set)

name: <id>-[parachain-name]-<relaychain-name>
id: <id>_testent

Thx!

@pepoviola pepoviola added enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers question Further information is requested labels Nov 17, 2023
@pepoviola pepoviola assigned JoshOrndorff and unassigned pepoviola Nov 17, 2023
@JoshOrndorff
Copy link
Author

That's fine with me. Any reason not to do protocolId as well?

@pepoviola
Copy link
Collaborator

That's fine with me. Any reason not to do protocolId as well?

No particular reason, we can also put the para_id, wdyt? Or maybe allow to set from the config, in a new field for the parachain.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants