Neo-node Migration

[lock9]

Migrating neo-node project into the Neo repository.

Observations:

• The project names weren't following naming conventions.
  • neo-cli renamed to Neo.CLI
  • neo-gui renamed to Neo.GUI
  • Executable names remain the same
• .editorconfig from neo-node was discarded in favor of the current one (more complete)
• Docker file moved into the Neo.CLI project folder
  • It is used to build neo-cli
  • Passing framework parameter to the dotnet build command
  • The docker build was updated to match the new structure, but the image itself is broken
    • Tested on OSX. Maybe it's working on other platforms.
• Neo-node doesn't have a Directory.Build. props file.
• Neo-cli has a changelog file. This file wasn't migrated. Should it?
• ConsoleService has its own version (currently 1.2.0)
• The current neo workflow wasn't updated to distribute neo-cli
• Neo-node has a codeql workflow that is not present on Neo and wasn't migrated.
• There is a workflow that builds docker images but doesn't test it.
  • I didn't migrate this workflow since the Docker image doesn't seem to work, and running Docker may be resource-consuming.
• I didn't test Neo GUI

Question:
Should I update the workflow to generate and test neo-cli?

[RichardBelsum]

Does anyone use the neo-gui project, Should we remove it?

[Jim8y]

Does anyone use the neo-gui project, Should we remove it?

Won't hurt to keep it. At least this pr only focus on merging existing code.

[lock9]

Does anyone use the neo-gui project, Should we remove it?

I agree with @Liaojinghui. Let's avoid changing the structure during the migration.

[Jim8y]

@lock9 @shargon @roman-khimov @AnnaShaleva @superboyiii In case you feel it hard to verify the code, this script will help you to review that two folders (including all subdirs) of C# codes are exactly the same. If they are not, difference will be printed.

Directory Comparison Script

This script is designed to compare C# files between two directories (referred to as the original and merge directories), including their subdirectories. It ensures that not only the contents of the C# files are identical, but also that the directory structures and the number of files are the same.

Features

• Recursive Comparison: The script recursively searches through all subdirectories in both the original and merge directories for C# files.
• Content Verification: It compares each C# file in the original directory with its counterpart in the merge directory to ensure they are identical in content.
• Structure Verification: The script checks that each C# file in the original directory has a corresponding file at the same relative path in the merge directory.
• Difference Reporting: If any differences in content or structure are found, the script outputs the details of these differences.

Usage

1. Provide Directories: Run the script with two arguments - the paths to the original and merge directories.
2. Execute the Script: Save the script as compare_directories.sh, make it executable with chmod +x compare_directories.sh, and then run it as ./compare_directories.sh /path/to/original/dir /path/to/merge/dir.

#!/bin/bash

# Check if two arguments are passed
if [ "$#" -ne 2 ]; then
    echo "Usage: $0 <original_directory> <merge_directory>"
    exit 1
fi

original_dir=$1
merge_dir=$2

# Function to compare two directories
compare_directories() {
    local dir1=$1
    local dir2=$2

    # Get relative paths of all C# files in the first directory
    local files_dir1=($(cd "$dir1" && find . -type f -name "*.cs"))
    
    # Loop through each file in the first directory
    for file1 in "${files_dir1[@]}"; do
        local file2="${dir2}/${file1#./}"

        if [ ! -f "$file2" ]; then
            echo "File missing in $dir2: $file1"
            continue
        fi

        # Compare the contents of the two files
        if ! cmp -s "${dir1}/${file1}" "$file2"; then
            echo "Difference found in file: $file1"
            echo "----"
            diff "${dir1}/${file1}" "$file2"
            echo "----"
        fi
    done
}

# Compare original to merge
compare_directories "$original_dir" "$merge_dir"

# Compare merge to original (to catch any extra files in merge)
compare_directories "$merge_dir" "$original_dir"

[Jim8y]

We can also add it to the workflow to automatically check the code base.

name: Compare Codebases

on:
  pull_request:
    branches: [ master ]

jobs:
  compare:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
    - name: Checkout Repository
      uses: actions/checkout@v2

    - name: Checkout Target Repository
      uses: actions/checkout@v2
      with:
        repository: 'https://github.com/neo-project/neo-node.git'
        ref: 'https://github.com/neo-project/neo-node/commit/da786195cfb6d70236bb37611c37d7016bbc3aae'
        path: 'neo-cli'

    - name: Compare Directories
      run: |
        chmod +x ./compare_directories.sh
        ./compare_directories.sh ./ ${{ github.workspace }}/Neo.CLI > difference.log || true

    - name: Upload differences if any
      uses: actions/upload-artifact@v2
      if: failure()
      with:
        name: differences
        path: difference.log

[roman-khimov]

this script

I think I trust diff -puraN a bit more.

[Jim8y]

this script

I think I trust diff -puraN a bit more.

As long as it can convince you to move monorepo faster.

[shargon]

I think that we should wait the following PR (also for clean the issues in the repo):

• Added icon to applications neo-node#908
• Added blockchain show block/transactions/contracts commands neo-node#905

[shargon]

@lock9 could you update the code?

[lock9]

Hi @shargon,
I was confirming the PRs to be merged. I didn't see they were two. I'll update it today.

[shargon]

The issues are ready to be transferred to this repository, the description and tag have been updated.

[shargon]

Dockerfile was removed? (found)

[shargon]

@lock9 we need to update the main README

[lock9]

@lock9 we need to update the main README

Ok.

coverage/coveralls — Coverage decreased (-51.5%) to 14.984%

What are we going to do about the code coverage? Add the UT?

[lock9]

coverage/coveralls — Coverage remained the same at 66.505%

What happened? I just updated the readme...?