feat(canton): integrate Canton support by RodrigoAD · Pull Request #613 · smartcontractkit/mcms

RodrigoAD · 2026-02-06T15:24:24Z

No description provided.

- Adds Canton configurer implementation, unit and e2e tests

changeset-bot · 2026-02-06T15:24:30Z

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: b1fc944

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

- Adapts to latest contract changes - Removes DAML client to use raw pb client

- E2e tests, contract updates

## Desc Resolve targetCids execution time - Added TargetTemplateID field to AdditionalFields - Added ResolveTargetContractID resolver function - Updated `TimelockExecutor.Execute` and `Executor.ExecuteOperation` for auto-resolution

# Conflicts: # go.mod # go.sum # types/chain_selector.go

Resolve go.mod/go.sum conflicts by keeping main dependency updates alongside Canton-specific modules (chainlink-canton, go-daml, dazl-client, chainlink-deployments-framework). Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

gustavogama-cll

Submitting a few thoughts after a shallow initial pass because I think there is one request (the last comment) that might require a bigger refactoring.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-05-29T19:09:05Z

I don't see canton changes to the chainwrappers/executors_test.go in this PR, nor in #628.

this is what I have in mind:
ad7ee04

I don't think we need a separate test case for canton. And this exercises the code paths more thoroughly.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 41 out of 43 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.

Files not reviewed (1)

chainwrappers/mocks/chain_accessor.go: Language not supported

+		AddChainMetadata(s.chainSelector, cancellerMetadata).
+		SetAction(types.TimelockActionCancel).
+		SetDelay(delay).
+		SetSalt((*common.Hash)(new(scheduleProposal.Salt()))).


gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T20:14:59Z

+	}
+
+	return types.TransactionResult{
+		Hash:        "tx.Digest",


or maybe we should use transaction.GetExternalTransactionHash()?

Hash: "0x" + hex.EncodeToString(transaction.GetExternalTransactionHash()),

follow up question: I see the other methods are returning commandID, as mentioned by Copilot. So, if "commandID" makes more sense for Canton than the transaction hash, we should use it (though I'd be curious to understand why "commandID" is the right choice and not the tx hash).

Either way, a hardcoded "tx.Digest" seems wrong.

+	case chainsel.FamilyCanton:
+		ch, ok := chains.CantonChain(rawSelector)
+		if !ok || len(ch.Participants) == 0 {
+			return nil, fmt.Errorf("missing Canton chain participant for selector %d", rawSelector)
+		}
+		participant := ch.Participants[0]
+		mcmsParties := lo.Map(ch.Participants, func(p cantonsdk.Participant, _ int) string { return p.PartyID })
+
+		return cantonsdk.NewTimelockExecutor(
+			participant.LedgerServices.Command,
+			participant.LedgerServices.State,
+			participant.PartyID,
+			mcmsParties,
+		), nil


+func PadLeft32(hexStr string) string {
+	if len(hexStr) >= hexWordLen {
+		return hexStr[:hexWordLen]
+	}
+
+	return strings.Repeat("0", hexWordLen-len(hexStr)) + hexStr
+}


+	// Build exercise command using generated bindings
+	mcmsContract := mcmscore.MCMS{}
+	exerciseCmd := mcmsContract.SetConfig(mcmsContractID, input)
+
+	// Parse template ID
+	packageID, moduleName, entityName, err := parseTemplateIDFromString(mcmsContract.GetTemplateID())
+	if err != nil {
+		return types.TransactionResult{}, fmt.Errorf("failed to parse template ID: %w", err)
+	}
+
+	// Convert input to choice argument
+	choiceArgument := ledger.MapToValue(input)
+
+	commandID := uuid.Must(uuid.NewUUID()).String()
+	submitResp, err := c.client.SubmitAndWaitForTransaction(ctx, &apiv2.SubmitAndWaitForTransactionRequest{
+		Commands: &apiv2.Commands{
+			WorkflowId: "mcms-set-config",
+			CommandId:  commandID,
+			ActAs:      []string{c.mcmsParties[0]},
+			ReadAs:     c.mcmsParties,
+			Commands: []*apiv2.Command{{
+				Command: &apiv2.Command_Exercise{
+					Exercise: &apiv2.ExerciseCommand{
+						TemplateId: &apiv2.Identifier{
+							PackageId:  packageID,
+							ModuleName: moduleName,
+							EntityName: entityName,
+						},
+						ContractId:     exerciseCmd.ContractID,
+						Choice:         exerciseCmd.Choice,
+						ChoiceArgument: choiceArgument,
+					},
+				},
+			}},
+		},
+	})


Copilot

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 42 out of 44 changed files in this pull request and generated 5 comments.

Files not reviewed (1)

chainwrappers/mocks/chain_accessor.go: Language not supported

+// parseTemplateIDFromString parses a template ID string like "#package:Module:Entity" into its components
+func parseTemplateIDFromString(templateID string) (packageID, moduleName, entityName string, err error) {
+	if !strings.HasPrefix(templateID, "#") {
+		return "", "", "", fmt.Errorf("template ID must start with #")
+	}
+	parts := strings.Split(templateID, ":")
+	if len(parts) != templateIDPartCount {
+		return "", "", "", fmt.Errorf("template ID must have format #package:module:entity, got: %s", templateID)
+	}
+
+	return parts[0], parts[1], parts[2], nil
+}


+	commandID := uuid.Must(uuid.NewUUID()).String()
+	submitResp, err := c.client.SubmitAndWaitForTransaction(ctx, &apiv2.SubmitAndWaitForTransactionRequest{
+		Commands: &apiv2.Commands{
+			WorkflowId: "mcms-set-config",
+			CommandId:  commandID,
+			ActAs:      []string{c.mcmsParties[0]},
+			ReadAs:     c.mcmsParties,
+			Commands: []*apiv2.Command{{
+				Command: &apiv2.Command_Exercise{
+					Exercise: &apiv2.ExerciseCommand{
+						TemplateId: &apiv2.Identifier{
+							PackageId:  packageID,
+							ModuleName: moduleName,
+							EntityName: entityName,
+						},
+						ContractId:     exerciseCmd.ContractID,
+						Choice:         exerciseCmd.Choice,
+						ChoiceArgument: choiceArgument,
+					},
+				},
+			}},
+		},
+	})


+	return types.TransactionResult{
+		Hash:        "tx.Digest",
+		ChainFamily: cselectors.FamilyCanton,
+		RawData:     rawDataFromMCMSTx(newMCMSContractID, newMCMSTemplateID, submitResp),
+	}, nil


+	cancelProposal, err := mcms.NewTimelockProposalBuilder().
+		SetVersion("v1").
+		SetValidUntil(validUntil).
+		SetDescription("Canton timelock - cancel scheduled batch").
+		AddTimelockAddress(s.chainSelector, s.mcmsInstanceAddress).
+		AddChainMetadata(s.chainSelector, cancellerMetadata).
+		SetAction(types.TimelockActionCancel).
+		SetDelay(delay).
+		SetSalt((*common.Hash)(new(scheduleProposal.Salt()))).
+		AddOperation(bop).
+		Build()


gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T04:29:42Z

+	data, err := hex.DecodeString(sb.String())
+	if err != nil {
+		panic("HashTimelockOpId: invalid hex encoding: " + err.Error())
+	}


I understand the current code paths ensure predecessor and salt are hex, but it's hard to keep track of this type of thing long term. I feels this is making a bad tradeoff just to save ~10 lines of error handling.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 45 out of 47 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.

Files not reviewed (1)

chainwrappers/mocks/chain_accessor.go: Language not supported

+	return types.TransactionResult{
+		Hash:        "tx.Digest",
+		ChainFamily: cselectors.FamilyCanton,
+		RawData:     rawDataFromMCMSTx(newMCMSContractID, newMCMSTemplateID, submitResp),
+	}, nil


+		return "", "", "", fmt.Errorf("template ID must have format #package:module:entity, got: %s", templateID)
+	}
+
+	return parts[0], parts[1], parts[2], nil


+func encodeOperationDataForHash(operationData string) string {
+	if isValidHex(operationData) {
+		return operationData
+	}
+
+	return asciiToHex(operationData)
+}


+func ValidateAdditionalFields(additionalFields json.RawMessage) error {
+	if len(additionalFields) == 0 {
+		return nil
+	}
+
+	var fields AdditionalFields
+	if err := json.Unmarshal(additionalFields, &fields); err != nil {
+		return fmt.Errorf("failed to unmarshal Canton additional fields: %w", err)
+	}
+
+	return fields.Validate()
+}


+// AdditionalFieldsMetadata represents the Canton-specific metadata fields.
+// MultisigId must be makeMcmsId(instanceId, role) e.g. "mcms-001-proposer" (DAML SetRoot/ExecuteOp).
+// InstanceId is the base MCMS instanceId for self-dispatch TargetInstanceId (DAML E_NOT_SELF_DISPATCH).


+func PadLeft32(hexStr string) string {
+	if len(hexStr) >= hexWordLen {
+		return hexStr[:hexWordLen]
+	}
+
+	return strings.Repeat("0", hexWordLen-len(hexStr)) + hexStr
+}


+	// Build cancel proposal - reuse the same batch operation (the converter extracts operationId)
+	// Use the same salt as the schedule proposal to derive the same operation ID
+	cancelProposal, err := mcms.NewTimelockProposalBuilder().
+		SetVersion("v1").
+		SetValidUntil(validUntil).
+		SetDescription("Canton timelock - cancel scheduled batch").
+		AddTimelockAddress(s.chainSelector, s.mcmsInstanceAddress).
+		AddChainMetadata(s.chainSelector, cancellerMetadata).
+		SetAction(types.TimelockActionCancel).
+		SetDelay(delay).
+		SetSalt((*common.Hash)(new(scheduleProposal.Salt()))).
+		AddOperation(bop).
+		Build()


cl-sonarqube-production · 2026-06-02T20:43:43Z

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
9.4% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 75%)

See analysis details on SonarQube

gustavogama-cll

Need to take a break and will resume later. As a general comment, I find the test coverage pretty lacking. According to Sonarqube we're at ~9%. We have the e2e tests, which are definitely important but I do feel like there's a lot of missing unit tests which would help us maintain and validate the scenarios that deviate from the happy paths.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T19:38:59Z

+	ChainId              int64  `json:"chainId"`
+	MultisigId           string `json:"multisigId"`
+	InstanceId           string `json:"instanceId,omitempty"` // base instanceId; converter uses for TargetInstanceId in ScheduleBatch etc.
+	PreOpCount           uint64 `json:"preOpCount"`


why are PreOpCount, PostOpCount and OverridePreviousRoot part of "AdditionalFieldsMetadata"? The AdditionalFields attribute should be reserved for data that the mcms clients need to manually add.

PreOpCount seems to be the same as StartingOpCount, OverridePreviousRoot is already available as an attribute of the proposal itself, and PostOpCount can be calculated on the fly when needed using txcount and startingOpCount.

I spent a few minutes commenting out these fields to check my understanding and see it something would break: b6da3ed

Looks ok to my eyes. Let me know if I'm missing something.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T20:14:59Z

+	}
+
+	return types.TransactionResult{
+		Hash:        "tx.Digest",


or maybe we should use transaction.GetExternalTransactionHash()?

Hash: "0x" + hex.EncodeToString(transaction.GetExternalTransactionHash()),

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T20:43:13Z

this is what I have in mind:
ad7ee04

I don't think we need a separate test case for canton. And this exercises the code paths more thoroughly.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T21:00:35Z

+	if n < 0 {
+		panic("intToHex: negative numbers not supported")
+	}
+	if n == 0 {


nit: fmt.Sprintf("%x", n) returns "0". I don't understand why we need the if n == 0.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T21:03:09Z

+
+	// Build the encoded data with domain separator and length prefix for multisigId
+	encoded := metadataLeafDomainSeparator +
+		padLeft32(intToHex(int(metadataFields.ChainId))) +


since intToHex and and padLeft32 can panic, should we add checks to the metadata validation? I see we do chainId != 0 but not chainId < 0. Maybe we could add similar checks to MultisigId and any other fields which we indirectly pass to functions that can panic.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T21:08:51Z

+)
+
+const (
+	MCMSTemplateKey = "MCMS.Main:MCMS"


nit: it feels like some of these constants should be defined closer to where they are used. A dedicated constants.go file is ok as well, but placing everything in helpers.go is confusing.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T21:12:36Z

+}
+
+// ParseTemplateIDFromString is the exported version of parseTemplateIDFromString
+func ParseTemplateIDFromString(templateID string) (packageID, moduleName, entityName string, err error) {


why do we need the unexported version?

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T21:13:12Z

+}
+
+// FormatTemplateID is the exported version of formatTemplateID
+func FormatTemplateID(id *apiv2.Identifier) string {


same question here: why do we need an unexported version?

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T21:16:44Z

+	}
+
+	return types.TransactionResult{
+		Hash:        "tx.Digest",


follow up question: I see the other methods are returning commandID, as mentioned by Copilot. So, if "commandID" makes more sense for Canton than the transaction hash, we should use it (though I'd be curious to understand why "commandID" is the right choice and not the tx hash).

Either way, a hardcoded "tx.Digest" seems wrong.

gustavogama-cll

another quick round, will resume later

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T23:32:41Z

+	// Parse the root from hex string
+	rootStr := string(expiringRoot.Root)
+	rootStr = strings.TrimPrefix(rootStr, "0x")
+	rootBytes, err := hex.DecodeString(rootStr)
+	if err != nil {
+		return common.Hash{}, 0, fmt.Errorf("failed to decode root hash: %w", err)
+	}
+
+	root := common.BytesToHash(rootBytes)


Suggested change

// Parse the root from hex string

rootStr := string(expiringRoot.Root)

rootStr = strings.TrimPrefix(rootStr, "0x")

rootBytes, err := hex.DecodeString(rootStr)

if err != nil {

return common.Hash{}, 0, fmt.Errorf("failed to decode root hash: %w", err)

}

root := common.BytesToHash(rootBytes)

root := common.HexToHash(string(expiringRoot.Root))

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T23:40:49Z

+	}
+
+	// For Canton, MCMAddress is the InstanceAddress hex (stable across SetRoot/ExecuteOp)
+	mcmAddress := contracts.InstanceID(string(mcmsContract.InstanceId)).RawInstanceAddress(mcmsContract.Owner).InstanceAddress().Hex()


I'm not sure I understand this. It seems we return a different address than the one passed as input. I see aptos and sui doing the same thing but I do want to flag it because this is counterintuitive to me and a potential source of bugs.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T23:44:17Z

+		}
+
+		quorum := uint8(0)
+		if i < len(bindConfig.GroupQuorums) {


nit: you can drop this condition and simplify the code a bit if you check that len(bindConfig.GroupQuorums) <= maxMCMSGroups before the for.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T23:44:50Z

+	// Process in reverse order to build the tree from leaves to root
+	for i := maxMCMSGroups - 1; i >= 0; i-- {
+		parent := uint8(0)
+		if i < len(bindConfig.GroupParents) {


same thing here; you can check that len(bindConfig.GroupParents) <= maxMCMSGroups before the for.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-02T23:46:45Z

@@ -0,0 +1,200 @@
+//go:build e2e


appreciate the unit tests (for a change 😛 ) but why does it need the go:build e2e?

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T02:43:53Z

can't we merge this into the helpers.go file? I don't see a good reason to have two files for generic helpers.

the chain_metadata.go file might also be a good option since the CantonRoleFromAction function is related to the TimelockRole that is defined there.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T03:20:45Z

+	}
+
+	// Extract metadata fields for chainId and multisigId
+	var metadataFields struct {


don't we have AdditionalFieldsMetadata and parseAdditionalFieldsMetadata already?

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T03:30:04Z

+		return types.TransactionResult{}, fmt.Errorf("failed to parse template ID: %w", err)
+	}
+
+	commandID := uuid.Must(uuid.NewUUID()).String()


Suggested change

commandID := uuid.Must(uuid.NewUUID()).String()

commandID := uuid.NewString()

(unless you need uuid v1)

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T03:36:30Z

+	// Convert input to choice argument
+	choiceArgument := ledger.MapToValue(input)
+
+	commandID := uuid.Must(uuid.NewUUID()).String()


same suggestion:

Suggested change

commandID := uuid.Must(uuid.NewUUID()).String()

commandID := uuid.NewString()

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T03:37:10Z

+	}, nil
+}
+
+func PadLeft32(hexStr string) string {


this isn't used; you already have padLeft32 in encoder.go.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T04:25:24Z

+		ChainSelector: bop.ChainSelector,
+		Transaction: types.Transaction{
+			To:               mcmAddress,
+			Data:             []byte{0x00}, // placeholder for validators; Canton uses AdditionalFields.OperationData


why use OperationData and not Data?

I'm also curious as to why we need to duplicate mcmAddress as TargetCid. I tried to follow the execution flow but it seems TargetCid isn't really used (other than check for "TargetCid == ""` in executor.go).

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T04:26:03Z

+
+// TimelockCallForHash is used for computing the operation ID hash.
+// Field semantics match mcms.TimelockCall (TargetInstanceAddress, FunctionName, OperationData).
+type TimelockCallForHash struct {


this can probably be made private

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T04:26:18Z

+// HashTimelockOpId computes the operation ID for timelock operations.
+// Matches Canton's hashTimelockOpId: keccak256(encodedCalls || predecessor || salt).
+// predecessor and salt should be hex-encoded (e.g. 64-char hex for 32-byte hashes).
+func HashTimelockOpId(calls []TimelockCallForHash, predecessor, salt string) string {


gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T04:29:42Z

+	data, err := hex.DecodeString(sb.String())
+	if err != nil {
+		panic("HashTimelockOpId: invalid hex encoding: " + err.Error())
+	}


I understand the current code paths ensure predecessor and salt are hex, but it's hard to keep track of this type of thing long term. I feels this is making a bad tradeoff just to save ~10 lines of error handling.

gustavogama-cll · 2026-06-03T04:32:40Z

+	return asciiToHex(operationData)
+}
+
+func isValidHex(s string) bool {


there's some redundancy with IsInstanceAddressHex in resolver.go. Maybe it should call isValidHex.

RodrigoAD added 2 commits February 6, 2026 16:02

Add Canton Configurer (#598)

226bd7f

- Adds Canton configurer implementation, unit and e2e tests

tidy mod

7c75c31

RodrigoAD and others added 5 commits February 6, 2026 16:26

Bump canton (#612)

a28d73a

feat(canton): implement inspector (#609)

2e3dae4

Canton executor (#622)

eb29c4c

Canton bump (#627)

4317836

- Adapts to latest contract changes - Removes DAML client to use raw pb client

feat(canton): Implement timelock interfaces (#636)

f8fb559

github-code-quality Bot found potential problems Feb 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread sdk/canton/resolver.go Fixed

JohnChangUK and others added 5 commits April 7, 2026 22:57

Update canton MCMS to latest with e2e tests (#699)

900d559

- E2e tests, contract updates

Resolve targetCids Execution time (#712)

0771796

## Desc Resolve targetCids execution time - Added TargetTemplateID field to AdditionalFields - Added ResolveTargetContractID resolver function - Updated `TimelockExecutor.Execute` and `Executor.ExecuteOperation` for auto-resolution

Add Canton chainwrapper support

d868bdf

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into canton-main

d214396

fix merge

8df2ee5

RodrigoAD force-pushed the canton-main branch from 907077c to 8df2ee5 Compare April 21, 2026 10:58

stackman27 added 3 commits April 23, 2026 12:54

update go-daml

32c2a97

add canton

d3c951d

added timelock_converter canton

3cd8c26

github-code-quality Bot found potential problems May 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread sdk/canton/resolver.go Fixed

Update chainlink-canton bindings imports and dependency

03cc176

JohnChangUK force-pushed the canton-main branch from 0332192 to 03cc176 Compare May 7, 2026 15:42

friedemannf added 2 commits May 8, 2026 11:14

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into canton-main

62a07d8

# Conflicts: # go.mod # go.sum # types/chain_selector.go

Add separate submitter party

b1fc944

friedemannf force-pushed the canton-main branch from 89a5ccc to b1fc944 Compare May 8, 2026 13:49

github-code-quality Bot found potential problems May 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread sdk/canton/resolver.go Fixed

[]string mcms parties

113e45c

github-code-quality Bot found potential problems May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread sdk/canton/resolver.go Fixed

stackman27 and others added 3 commits May 20, 2026 23:18

add metadata info for canton

1b8eb5d

Merge origin/main into canton-main

22d1eb7

Resolve go.mod/go.sum conflicts by keeping main dependency updates alongside Canton-specific modules (chainlink-canton, go-daml, dazl-client, chainlink-deployments-framework). Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

lint

d545a44

gustavogama-cll requested changes May 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

gustavos feedback

747b668

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings May 29, 2026 21:07

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of stackman27 May 29, 2026 21:07 View session

Merge branch 'main' into canton-main

ead6ce0

Copilot AI reviewed May 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

friedemannf added 2 commits May 31, 2026 18:23

Use bindings for MCMS unmarshal

d6240f9

Bump go-daml

3a6d240

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings May 31, 2026 16:31

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of friedemannf May 31, 2026 16:32 View session

Copilot AI reviewed May 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

stackman27 mentioned this pull request May 31, 2026

fix mcms reader smartcontractkit/chainlink-canton#579

Draft

stackman27 added 2 commits May 31, 2026 16:24

populate additionalFields via encoder

6a4fcd4

fixed lint

b96d10a

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings June 1, 2026 19:37

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of stackman27 June 1, 2026 19:37 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jun 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

stackman27 requested a review from gustavogama-cll June 1, 2026 19:47

Bump chainlink-canton

0cd9cb4

gustavogama-cll reviewed Jun 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread validation.go

additional validation

b37122e

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings June 2, 2026 20:01

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of stackman27 June 2, 2026 20:01 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jun 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

fix wiring

8124890

stackman27 requested a review from gustavogama-cll June 2, 2026 20:48

gustavogama-cll reviewed Jun 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

gustavogama-cll reviewed Jun 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

	commandID := uuid.Must(uuid.NewUUID()).String()
	commandID := uuid.NewString()

Conversation

RodrigoAD commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

changeset-bot Bot commented Feb 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

⚠️ No Changeset found

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gustavogama-cll left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gustavogama-cll Jun 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

cl-sonarqube-production Bot commented Jun 2, 2026

Quality Gate failed

Uh oh!

gustavogama-cll left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gustavogama-cll Jun 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gustavogama-cll Jun 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

changeset-bot Bot commented Feb 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gustavogama-cll Jun 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gustavogama-cll Jun 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gustavogama-cll Jun 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading