Skip to content

Conversation

@dorimedini-starkware
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@reviewable-StarkWare
Copy link

This change is Reviewable

Copy link
Collaborator Author

dorimedini-starkware commented Oct 28, 2025

This was referenced Oct 28, 2025
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware self-assigned this Oct 28, 2025
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware marked this pull request as ready for review October 28, 2025 14:14
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_use_nonce_as_deployment_salt branch from f522dd2 to 54f6fac Compare November 9, 2025 15:34
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_split_test_new_class_flow_exec-info_txs branch from 6970e8d to fc257ac Compare November 9, 2025 15:35
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_use_nonce_as_deployment_salt branch from 54f6fac to abf460c Compare November 12, 2025 12:48
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_split_test_new_class_flow_exec-info_txs branch from fc257ac to ee849c4 Compare November 12, 2025 12:48
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_use_nonce_as_deployment_salt branch from abf460c to 2954fd9 Compare November 12, 2025 14:05
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_split_test_new_class_flow_exec-info_txs branch from ee849c4 to 31f0b3f Compare November 12, 2025 14:05
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_use_nonce_as_deployment_salt branch from 2954fd9 to 345db06 Compare November 12, 2025 18:00
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_split_test_new_class_flow_exec-info_txs branch from 31f0b3f to 116fb19 Compare November 12, 2025 18:00
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@dorimedini-starkware reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @meship-starkware)

@graphite-app graphite-app bot changed the base branch from 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_use_nonce_as_deployment_salt to graphite-base/9820 November 12, 2025 19:35
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the 10-28-starknet_os_flow_tests_split_test_new_class_flow_exec-info_txs branch from 116fb19 to 79536f1 Compare November 12, 2025 20:06
@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware changed the base branch from graphite-base/9820 to main-v0.14.1-committer November 12, 2025 20:06
Copy link
Collaborator

@meship-starkware meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@meship-starkware reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware)


crates/starknet_os_flow_tests/src/tests.rs line 1007 at r2 (raw file):

#[rstest]
#[tokio::test]
async fn test_new_class_execution_info(#[values(true, false)] use_kzg_da: bool) {

I am not sure why it does not pass with 5 blocks in a multi-block, but as it shouldn't be part of this test, this is non-blocking

Code quote:

async fn test_new_class_execution_info(#[values(true, false)] use_kzg_da: bool) {

Copy link
Collaborator

@meship-starkware meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware)


crates/starknet_os_flow_tests/src/tests.rs line 1007 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, meship-starkware (Meshi Peled) wrote…

I am not sure why it does not pass with 5 blocks in a multi-block, but as it shouldn't be part of this test, this is non-blocking

Never mind it's just a block number issue, you can ignore this comment

Copy link
Collaborator

@meship-starkware meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware)

Copy link
Collaborator

@meship-starkware meship-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

:lgtm:

Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware)

@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 13, 2025
Merged via the queue into main-v0.14.1-committer with commit e0106d8 Nov 13, 2025
14 of 20 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 15, 2025
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants