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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore!: remove NamespacedShares #822

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 30, 2022

Conversation

rootulp
Copy link
Collaborator

@rootulp rootulp commented Sep 30, 2022

Closes #721

@rootulp rootulp self-assigned this Sep 30, 2022
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Sep 30, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #822 (6ccaeba) into main (138e1bd) will decrease coverage by 0.46%.
The diff coverage is 71.05%.

@@            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              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
app/prepare_proposal.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
app/process_proposal.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
pkg/shares/shares.go 22.85% <23.52%> (-77.15%) ⬇️
pkg/shares/split_sparse_shares.go 67.96% <88.46%> (-0.41%) ⬇️
pkg/shares/split_compact_shares.go 81.50% <89.47%> (-2.73%) ⬇️
pkg/prove/proof.go 83.67% <100.00%> (-0.12%) ⬇️
pkg/shares/share_splitting.go 66.01% <100.00%> (+2.10%) ⬆️
x/payment/types/payfordata.go 76.33% <100.00%> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@rootulp rootulp marked this pull request as ready for review September 30, 2022 19:33
@rootulp rootulp enabled auto-merge (squash) September 30, 2022 19:54
Copy link
Member

@evan-forbes evan-forbes left a 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.

https://github.com/celestiaorg/celestia-node/blob/6455b1720aecc12f1bed0f823b30b76b04de24d1/ipld/share.go#L27-L30

@rootulp rootulp merged commit 906fdf7 into celestiaorg:main Sep 30, 2022
@rootulp
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rootulp commented Sep 30, 2022

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 Share type were common amongst all these repos so if not all Celestia repos can depend on celestia-app, then it seems reasonable to extract to a standalone package.

Ref:

@rootulp rootulp deleted the rp/remove-namespaced-shares branch October 1, 2022 01:58
rach-id pushed a commit to rach-id/celestia-app that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Remove type NamespacedShares from pkg/shares
3 participants