Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: integrating PCDs in CK #795

Open
3 tasks
0xisk opened this issue Aug 30, 2023 · 3 comments
Open
3 tasks

feat: integrating PCDs in CK #795

0xisk opened this issue Aug 30, 2023 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
馃敩 exploring Exploring new ideas 馃尡 new feature Troubleshooting new feature issues

Comments

@0xisk
Copy link
Member

0xisk commented Aug 30, 2023

This issue for experimenting integrating PCDs inspired Zupass PCD project.

Tasks

  1. 馃尡 new feature
    0xisk
  2. 0xisk
  3. 0xisk
@0xisk 0xisk self-assigned this Aug 30, 2023
@0xisk 0xisk added 馃敩 exploring Exploring new ideas 馃尡 new feature Troubleshooting new feature issues labels Aug 30, 2023
@0xisk
Copy link
Member Author

0xisk commented Aug 30, 2023

@0xisk
Copy link
Member Author

0xisk commented Sep 4, 2023

Based on discussion today with @0xmad about PCD, we got those three points:

  1. Forking the main PCD types from Zupass package, the advantage here is that we would be able to change the PCD structure according to our needs easily.

  2. Installing only @pcd/pcd-types npm package developed from Zupass project, and start integrating it with our monorepo.

  3. Adding types system similar to the PCDs for our current Verifiable Credentials and use it as our standard.

We would stick to option (2) as a solution of us now. And that would give us different advantages:

  1. Easily introducing the PCD concept in events like DevConnect.
  2. Clarifying that we are using and depending in the PCD concept defined by Zupass project so then we have a one unified concept for the same term.

For the third point we would need to have more discussions on that with the team. (Long-term discussion point for PCDs and VCs). ( @AtHeartEngineer @AndrewCLu )

We also discussed that we would start integrating those PCDs:

  • Semaphore Identity PCD
  • Semaphore Group PCD
  • Semaphore Signature PCD
  • RLN PCD
  • Ethereum Group PCD
  • Ethereum Ownership PCD

@AtHeartEngineer
Copy link
Member

  1. I wouldn't fork them unless you have to; I would just use the dependencies (like https://www.npmjs.com/package/@pcd/semaphore-group-pcd) Hopefully that is usable without having to fork them

2/3. @pcd/pcd-types yes definitely, we should talk about converting the current semaphore/rln types to this as well.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
馃敩 exploring Exploring new ideas 馃尡 new feature Troubleshooting new feature issues
Projects
Status: 鉁嶏笍 To do
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants