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

Add SIP for Code Verification API #3

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

kairoski03
Copy link

@kairoski03 kairoski03 commented May 31, 2023

Hello,
This SIP suggests APIs for code verification for explorer.
Thank you.

@kairoski03
Copy link
Author

@wriches Hello, I changed copyright to use CCO 1.0 and supplement contents.

@hyd628
Copy link
Member

hyd628 commented Jul 27, 2023

Thank you for submitting this proposal. The content and design of this all look fine to me, and while we definitely do need something like this in the ecosystem, the main issue is that I don’t think this is appropriate for an SIP, which should be a change to core Sui Move codebase or otherwise an ecosystem level change.

It doesn’t appear to me that this functionality requires anything to change within the core Sui move code base. This creates an external REST or WS based service that allows the checking if a package has been verified against its bytecode.

I think the more appropriate path forward would be to implement this service, then expose it through public REST endpoints, similar to Sourcefy for Ethereum/EVM chains. Then you can work with any product or platform, such as explorers and wallets that could take advantage of this service to check if a package is verified, to get this integrated.

If you want the official Sui explorer to utilize this functionality, you should make a PR specific to the Sui explorer.

This service also should not be the only way to verify packages in Sui, but one of the available options, as we don’t want to enforce any kind of ecosystem level standard on how these services should be built (we want a wide range of package verification tools ideally), which an SIP would imply.

Due to the above reasons, I would recommend not moving this proposal to the next stage.

If you want to apply for a developer grant for developing this service (which I think would also be appropriate), you can apply here.

If you have any questions about this, please reach out to me on TG.

@hyd628
Copy link
Member

hyd628 commented Nov 14, 2023

Inactive and feature already implemented

@hyd628 hyd628 closed this Nov 14, 2023
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.

None yet

3 participants