Skip to content

refactor: Ensure event and error processing backward and forward compatibility #658

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
Open
snowmead wants to merge 10 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

refactor: Ensure event and error processing backward and forward compatibility #658

snowmead wants to merge 10 commits into from

Conversation

@snowmead
Copy link
Contributor

@snowmead snowmead commented Jan 21, 2026 •
edited
Loading

The changes introduce guardrails to prevent client-side decoding failures caused by breaking changes to events or error enums/variants in StorageHub pallets.

What this PR adds:

  • Explicit codec indices (#[codec(index = N)]) on all event and error variants across StorageHub pallets, ensuring SCALE encoding/decoding is deterministic regardless of source code ordering.
  • Documentation establishing encoding stability rules: pallet indices must be immutable, variant indices must never change or be reused, and breaking changes require new versioned variants (e.g., NewStorageRequestV2).
  • Improved error messages in the client when event/error decoding fails, clarifying that a runtime upgrade likely introduced an incompatible change.

@snowmead
refactor: Improve event and error handling for event processing
22aa6b6 
Added event and error code overriding indexes to preserve ordering
@snowmead snowmead added B5-clientnoteworthy Changes should be mentioned client-related release notes B7-runtimenoteworthy Changes should be noted in any runtime-upgrade release notes D4-nicetohaveaudit⚠️ PR contains trivial changes to logic that should be properly reviewed. not-breaking Does not need to be mentioned in breaking changes labels Jan 22, 2026
@snowmead snowmead marked this pull request as ready for review January 27, 2026 21:03
@snowmead snowmead requested review from TDemeco and ffarall January 27, 2026 21:03
ffarall
ffarall reviewed Jan 30, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@ffarall ffarall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

PR is basically approved. I'm only not approving it now, to prevent it from being merged before other PRs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@ffarall ffarall ffarall left review comments

@TDemeco TDemeco Awaiting requested review from TDemeco

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

B5-clientnoteworthy Changes should be mentioned client-related release notes B7-runtimenoteworthy Changes should be noted in any runtime-upgrade release notes D4-nicetohaveaudit⚠️ PR contains trivial changes to logic that should be properly reviewed. not-breaking Does not need to be mentioned in breaking changes

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@snowmead @ffarall