From 9eea06ff89c6ff902ecbf5138aa63512675444a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "cmd[bot]" <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 13:54:31 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Update from bkontur running command 'prdoc --audience
 runtime_dev --bump patch'

---
 prdoc/pr_7592.prdoc | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 prdoc/pr_7592.prdoc

diff --git a/prdoc/pr_7592.prdoc b/prdoc/pr_7592.prdoc
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..2ab316d1b6f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/prdoc/pr_7592.prdoc
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+title: Add `Paras` authorize code_hash for `(force_)set_current_code` feature
+doc:
+- audience: Runtime Dev
+  description: |-
+    Closes: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/7574
+    Relates to: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/7591
+
+    This feature can be useful when we want to trigger `Paras::force_set_current_code(para, code)` from a different chain than the one where the `Paras` pallet is deployed.
+
+    The main reason is to avoid transferring the entire `new_code` wasm blob between chains.
+    Instead, we authorize `new_code_hash` with `root`, which can later be applied by `Paras::apply_authorized_force_set_current_code(para, new_code)` by anyone.
+
+
+    ## Open questions
+
+    - [ ] Do we need something like `poke_authorized_code_hash`? E.g. in case that we authorize code hash, but nobody would apply it and the parachain starts working with old code? Is this possible?
+crates:
+- name: polkadot-runtime-parachains
+  bump: patch
+- name: rococo-runtime
+  bump: patch
+- name: westend-runtime
+  bump: patch
-- 
GitLab