Merge #124: script: fix the test of different deployment parameters

198fafd script: fix the test of different deployment parameters (Antoine Poinsot)

Pull request description:

  We would concatenate the stakeholders' and managers' to pass them to the
  deposit descriptor. This makes no sense.

  I removed the test for parameters with a single stakeholders since this
  is forbidden since the beginning (although without a strong rationale,
  but let's not change that here).

  Reported-by: rndhouse <rndhouse@protonmail.com>

ACKs for top commit:
  edouardparis:
    ACK 198fafd

Tree-SHA512: 96a45fa8b6c22aaba2f8abc153358348f6b0c5bdd159663f0b7f9980461a506bfca86001b4c6f2b89c0b9a95b9977c75040abcdefa29cfc1961a35285689ce99

src/scripts.rs

@@ -1463,13 +1463,12 @@ mod tests {
         // Policy compilation takes time, so just test some remarkable ones
         let configurations = [
             // Single-manager configurations
-            ((1, 1), 1),
             ((1, 1), 2),
             ((1, 1), 5),
             // Multiple-manager configurations (with threshold)
             ((2, 2), 3),
             ((3, 4), 2),
-            ((7, 7), 1),
+            ((7, 7), 2),
             ((2, 3), 8),
             // Huge configurations
             ((15, 15), 5),
@@ -1503,15 +1502,7 @@ mod tests {
                 "Unvault descriptors creation error with ({}, {})",
                 n_managers, n_stakeholders,
             ));
-            DepositDescriptor::new(
-                managers
-                    .clone()
-                    .iter()
-                    .chain(stakeholders.iter())
-                    .cloned()
-                    .collect::<Vec<DescriptorPublicKey>>(),
-            )
-            .expect(&format!(
+            DepositDescriptor::new(stakeholders.clone()).expect(&format!(
                 "Deposit descriptors creation error with ({}, {})",
                 n_managers, n_stakeholders
             ));