Skip to content

relayer: use loop.Relayer instead of deprecated types.Relayer#365

Merged
Fletch153 merged 1 commit intodevelopfrom
NONEVM-100/remove-relayer-adapter-ext
Mar 10, 2026
Merged

relayer: use loop.Relayer instead of deprecated types.Relayer#365
Fletch153 merged 1 commit intodevelopfrom
NONEVM-100/remove-relayer-adapter-ext

Conversation

@Fletch153
Copy link
Contributor

@Fletch153 Fletch153 commented Mar 3, 2026

Summary

  • Switch compile-time interface assertion from types.Relayer to loop.Relayer
  • Remove 7 stub provider methods (NewMedianProvider, NewMercuryProvider, NewFunctionsProvider, NewAutomationProvider, NewOCR3CapabilityProvider, NewCCIPCommitProvider, NewCCIPExecProvider) that only existed to satisfy the larger deprecated interface
  • The GRPC server handles their absence via comma-ok type assertions, producing the same codes.Unimplemented response

Resolves NONEVM-100

Test plan

  • go vet ./relayer/... passes
  • go vet ./cmd/chainlink-aptos/ passes
  • CI build and tests pass

Switch the compile-time interface assertion from types.Relayer to
loop.Relayer and remove 7 stub provider methods that only existed to
satisfy the larger deprecated interface. The GRPC server handles their
absence via comma-ok type assertions, producing the same Unimplemented
response.
@Fletch153 Fletch153 requested a review from a team as a code owner March 3, 2026 20:19
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Mar 3, 2026

👋 Fletch153, thanks for creating this pull request!

To help reviewers, please consider creating future PRs as drafts first. This allows you to self-review and make any final changes before notifying the team.

Once you're ready, you can mark it as "Ready for review" to request feedback. Thanks!

@Fletch153 Fletch153 merged commit 5878eb7 into develop Mar 10, 2026
20 of 22 checks passed
@Fletch153 Fletch153 deleted the NONEVM-100/remove-relayer-adapter-ext branch March 10, 2026 15:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants