-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 277
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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
chore!: remove NamespacedShares
#822
chore!: remove NamespacedShares
#822
Conversation
158f0d7
to
6ccaeba
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #822 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 23.81% 23.35% -0.47%
==========================================
Files 71 71
Lines 8861 8839 -22
==========================================
- Hits 2110 2064 -46
- Misses 6576 6600 +24
Partials 175 175
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nice, in the future, we might want to consider implementing the Share
type as an alias, just like celestia-node does. Ideally, they should be able to use our implementation or we use a common implementation in a different repo (as discussed in the comments there). This might also be related to #802, in that that API will have to not include celestia-core or celestia-app in the dependency tree so that optimint can use it.
Thanks for sharing this context! I don't yet understand the benefit to using a type alias rather than a type definition. I do think it could be useful if the Ref: |
Closes #721