You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It seems that in some places we use way to generic type definition names for data structures such as Options. Due to ts-doc we still need to export them even though they are no intended to be used outside.
This can cause some minor issues in the future:
naming collision on the side of consumer if someone accidentally imports it;
naming collision within the library due to modular nature of it: some packages can re-export it and we can end up with different types with the same name.
Proposed Solutions
We should use more precise naming while avoiding being too verbose.
This issue is for tracking renaming of too-general type names.
This is a change request
Problem
It seems that in some places we use way to generic type definition names for data structures such as
Options
. Due tots-doc
we still need to export them even though they are no intended to be used outside.This can cause some minor issues in the future:
Proposed Solutions
We should use more precise naming while avoiding being too verbose.
This issue is for tracking renaming of too-general type names.
Notes
Original discussion: https://github.com/waku-org/js-waku/pull/1135/files#diff-f7c943c7b03f1d1fa65caeacc3a9e74bfc34e1f40b4d373e0b7aa522b35400deR39
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: