Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Migrate to latest actix-based Stronghold #370
Migrate to latest actix-based Stronghold #370
Changes from all commits
1d924b1
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
it looks like that this was the latest revision. is there a specific reason to not use head?
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.
You mean to specify
branch = "dev"
rather than a specific commit? We've just had some bad experience withiota-client
not pinning their commits to a specific version, which broke our build randomly. We'd thus rather do a manual upgrade 🙂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.
ok. if stronghold reaches stable, I would advise using the master branch.
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.
I think that this is debatable, because it is always safer to pin to a rev (even if it is a bit more opaque as to which rev you are actually consuming.) The other point is that there is only a
main
branch, not amaster
branch.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.
this should be fine, as stronghold implicitly runs on a single threaded tokio runtime. access to strongholds functionality is synchronized.
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.
Do you still think it makes sense to make the
Stronghold
type clonable and get rid of the mutex here? This can come at a later point, I think, but it would be good to remove the double synchronization. In any case, thanks for taking the time to review!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.
Stronghold
can be madeclone
able, since it only stores addresses. One issue i see here, is the synchronization between theactix
system and theruntime
used byidentity
. "Issue" in that sense that we need to create tworuntime
s. Maybe there is a way to lift this issue in the future.