People not removed in an exclude should be able to post on the new epoch

[Powersource]

Fixes #72

[mixmix]

paraMap(fn) === pull.asyncMap(fn)
You need to add a "width" for it to be running in parallel e.g. run at most 4 at once:

Suggested change

	}),
	}, 4),

[Powersource]

done

[mixmix]

we can move faster by comparing as we go and stopping as soon as we find a match

Suggested change

	pull(
	ssb.box2.listGroupIds(),
	pull.collect((err, groupIds) => {
	// prettier-ignore
	if (err) return cb(clarify(err, "Error getting groups we're already in when looking for new epochs"))
	if (groupIds.includes(msg.value?.content?.recps?.[0])) {
	return cb(null, msg)
	} else {
	return cb()
	}
	})
	)
	const groupId = msg.value.content.recps.[0]
	if (!groupId) return cb(null, null)
	pull(
	ssb.box2.listGroupIds(),
	pull.filter(id => id === groupId),
	pull.take(1),
	pull.collect((err, groupIds) => {
	// prettier-ignore
	if (err) return cb(clarify(err, "Error getting groups we're already in when looking for new epochs"))
	if (groupIds.length) return cb(null, msg)
	else cb(null, null)
	})
	)

[Powersource]

listGroupIds is basically sync, it's just a stream to allow for its live opt

[mixmix]

🔥 we should get rid of this with isGroupAdd waaay further up in the stream.
Then we never have to do this oh... do we have this thing or not? That's the whole reason I got into JSON-Schema.
Like in the line below

const newKey = Buffer.from(msg.value?.content?.groupKey, 'base64')

if groupKey is not there this code is gonna blow up in your face

[Powersource]

done

[mixmix]

Suggested change

	return msg.value?.content?.recps?.includes(myRoot.id)
	return isGroupAdd(msg) && msg.value.content.recps.includes(myRoot.id)

[Powersource]

checked against the spec in a filter before this so removed the ?s

[mixmix]

one 🔥 (must change)
minor performance suggestions

Good clear test <3