You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 11, 2024. It is now read-only.
Currently we are using a identifier lisk to specify the channel for application controller. Which in our case seems correct as we call our application lisk. But to align with custom application development, we should choose something more generic.
I suggest that we rather use app identifier for application controller. So who ever develop application with our sdk, can use this generic but more aligned identifier.
To clarify further, we are using above in a way channel.subscribe('lisk:ready', cb). In our case it seems correct but if someone develop another custom token and still use lisk identifier in code that will be confusing. So rather channel.subscribe('app:ready', cb) will be more clear and understandable.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently we are using a identifier
lisk
to specify the channel for application controller. Which in our case seems correct as we call our application lisk. But to align with custom application development, we should choose something more generic.I suggest that we rather use
app
identifier for application controller. So who ever develop application with our sdk, can use this generic but more aligned identifier.https://github.com/LiskHQ/lisk/blob/8f7ac1ce66e16616ecd38b7880d424630508b9ae/framework/src/controller/controller.js#L128
To clarify further, we are using above in a way
channel.subscribe('lisk:ready', cb)
. In our case it seems correct but if someone develop another custom token and still uselisk
identifier in code that will be confusing. So ratherchannel.subscribe('app:ready', cb)
will be more clear and understandable.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: