chore: add new Testnet Pop-Network #70
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 68e3c84 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
src/chains.ts
Outdated
| network: 'pop-network', | ||
| name: 'Pop Network', | ||
| ss58Prefix: 42, | ||
| rpcUrls: ['wss://rpc1.paseo.popnetwork.xyz', 'wss://rpc2.paseo.popnetwork.xyz'], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have launched an extra node 'wss://rpc3.paseo.popnetwork.xyz' :)
src/chains.ts
Outdated
| @@ -36,6 +36,18 @@ export const alephzeroTestnet: SubstrateChain = { | |||
| faucetUrls: ['https://faucet.test.azero.dev'], | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| export const popNetwork: SubstrateChain = { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is "Pop Network" solely a testnet or will there be a mainnet endpoint at some point, too? If yes, I would suggest a naming convention like: popMainnet & popTestnet. Wdyt? cc @al3mart
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if there already existed a naming convention for this relay/parachain scheme, but it think it would be worth coming up with a common scheme, than we it would be clear what the Pop Network mainnet and testnet would be depending on the relay chain.
Something like Paseo/PopNetwork, Polkadot/PopNetwork.
Thinking this even further it would be actually pretty cool imho to use some sort of defined standard for a simple string representation of full XCM multilocation for the chain. Than it would be more like a proper URI which can be used to create xcm destinations, cc @Daanvdplas.
https://paritytech.github.io/xcm-docs/fundamentals/multilocation/index.html
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That would be awesome @peetzweg. I guess something like the NetworkId would be useful for that
@wottpal this is pointing to the testnet, but it is meant to exist on Pokadot :) So making sure users can differentiate between both will be handy.
popNetwork and popTestnet might work perfectly fine! Though, if a common scheme is to be used we are more than happy to follow that. Personally, I like the idea of prepending the relay name to the parachain name, it reads very clear.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I changed it to popNetworkTestnet and pop-network-testnet for now. We might come up with a more general naming scheme for everything in the future but should for sure not be part of this pr. :)
Lines 39 to 40 in bc60f40
New pallet-contracts supporting testnet on the block.
Probably the replacement for
rococo.contractshttps://popnetwork.xyz/