feat(cosmos): Next upgrade is agoric-upgrade-18

[mujahidkay]

Description

Bumps the upgrade handler in golang/cosmos and renames a3p-integration/proposals/n:upgrade-next -> a3p-integration/proposals/a:upgrade-18 as per the naming conventions.
agoricSyntheticChain already points to use-upgrade-17 and not sure about s:stake-bld and z:acceptance so have left them as is.

Security Considerations

n/a

Scaling Considerations

n/a

Documentation Considerations

Will be provided with full release

Testing Considerations

a3p-integration tests already included

Upgrade Considerations

next chain software upgrade

[mhofman]

Are we not releasing variants for price feed purposes?

[mujahidkay]

as per my understanding, both replace-electorate-core.js and updatePriceFeeds.js used the same variants. But now that I have double-checked, updatePriceFeeds isn't using MAINNET and DEVNET as keys in its configuration.

const configurations = {
  A3P_INTEGRATION: {
    oracleAddresses: [
      'agoric1ee9hr0jyrxhy999y755mp862ljgycmwyp4pl7q', // GOV1
      'agoric1wrfh296eu2z34p6pah7q04jjuyj3mxu9v98277', // GOV2
      'agoric1ydzxwh6f893jvpaslmaz6l8j2ulup9a7x8qvvq', // GOV3
    ],
    inBrandNames: ['ATOM', 'stATOM'],
  },
  main: {
    oracleAddresses: [
      'agoric144rrhh4m09mh7aaffhm6xy223ym76gve2x7y78', // DSRV
      'agoric19d6gnr9fyp6hev4tlrg87zjrzsd5gzr5qlfq2p', // Stakin
      'agoric19uscwxdac6cf6z7d5e26e0jm0lgwstc47cpll8', // 01node
      'agoric1krunjcqfrf7la48zrvdfeeqtls5r00ep68mzkr', // Simply Staking
      'agoric1n4fcxsnkxe4gj6e24naec99hzmc4pjfdccy5nj', // P2P
    ],
    inBrandNames: ['ATOM', 'stATOM', 'stOSMO', 'stTIA', 'stkATOM'],
    contractTerms: { minSubmissionCount: 3 },
  },
  devnet: {
    oracleAddresses: [
      'agoric1lw4e4aas9q84tq0q92j85rwjjjapf8dmnllnft', // DSRV
      'agoric1zj6vrrrjq4gsyr9lw7dplv4vyejg3p8j2urm82', // Stakin
      'agoric1ra0g6crtsy6r3qnpu7ruvm7qd4wjnznyzg5nu4', // 01node
      'agoric1qj07c7vfk3knqdral0sej7fa6eavkdn8vd8etf', // Simply Staking
      'agoric10vjkvkmpp9e356xeh6qqlhrny2htyzp8hf88fk', // P2P
    ],
    inBrandNames: ['ATOM', 'stTIA', 'stkATOM'],
  },
};

so the variant name from getVariantFromUpgradeName wouldn't work for price feeds on devnet and mainnet. What do you think?

[mhofman]

@Chris-Hibbert can you clarify?

[Chris-Hibbert]

I've created #10363 to repair this.

[mhofman]

not sure about s:stake-bld

@turadg is this a sort of integration test, or planned future core eval. If the latter we should remove from this branch.

z:acceptance

That definitely should stay in this, that layer is purely for integration tests.

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying agoric-sdk with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	bcf26e0
Status:	✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL:	https://35980a38.agoric-sdk.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL:	https://init-upgrade-18.agoric-sdk.pages.dev

View logs

[turadg]

not sure about s:stake-bld

@turadg is this a sort of integration test, or planned future core eval. If the latter we should remove from this branch.

Integration test, to verify that when someone does make a proposal using Orchestration that it'll work. I suppose it should be part of z:acceptance so that we always know it'll work after all pending upgrades.

cc @anilhelvaci

[mujahidkay]

Should we keep this or remove as we do in isPrimaryUpgradeName? To be fair, we would never reach this case as it will be short-circuited in upgrade18Handler before getVariantFromUpgradeName has a chance to get invoked

[mhofman]

I think it doesn't cost much to keep.

[Muneeb147]

So this is the reason why tests are failing, right?
@mujahidkay

It should be a3p plan variant instead of MAINNET. And you will be updating the planName in a3p proposal json file as well. Did I get it right?

[mhofman]

Please gofmt

[mhofman]

I think it doesn't cost much to keep.