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

Revm 16.0.0 depends on alloy 0.3, resulting in duplicate crates #1828

Closed
ARitz-Cracker opened this issue Oct 17, 2024 · 6 comments
Closed

Revm 16.0.0 depends on alloy 0.3, resulting in duplicate crates #1828

ARitz-Cracker opened this issue Oct 17, 2024 · 6 comments

Comments

@ARitz-Cracker
Copy link

The alloydb feature provided by revm 16.0.0 still depends on outdated alloy crates. This results in duplicate (and conflicting) dependencies for alloy-eip7702.

Additionally, I've noticed that the 2 major version change releases today where based on a branch which diverged from main on Sept 9th. The main branch seemingly already has all the up-to-date dependencies. Are there plans to release a version on cargo based on the main branch anytime soonish?

@rakita
Copy link
Member

rakita commented Oct 17, 2024

Releases are done from release/* branches in this case release/v47 while main is getting a big refactor.

For why there is major version number bumped is because of the dependency bump on alloy-primitives that can be nasty. In reality it is maintainance/small release. it is better explained here: #1812

The alloydb database is a small wrapper of 200 lines. If you need to use it, I recommend copying it to your codebase.

@ARitz-Cracker
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the clarification!

@rakita
Copy link
Member

rakita commented Oct 17, 2024

Thanks for the clarification!

No problem, and thank you for using revm!

@ARitz-Cracker
Copy link
Author

The alloydb database is a small wrapper of 200 lines. If you need to use it, I recommend copying it to your codebase.

Just wanted a clarification on this, if we were to fork AlloyDB and maintain an updated version ourselves, may we use the crate name revm-alloy-db? You could then deprecate AlloyDB in revm in favour of our fork if you do not wish to maintain it further.

@rakita
Copy link
Member

rakita commented Oct 17, 2024

The alloydb database is a small wrapper of 200 lines. If you need to use it, I recommend copying it to your codebase.

Just wanted a clarification on this, if we were to fork AlloyDB and maintain an updated version ourselves, may we use the crate name revm-alloy-db? You could then deprecate AlloyDB in revm in favour of our fork if you do not wish to maintain it further.

This seems reasonable. There is a potential future where this is included directly in alloy, but until then be free to publish revm-alloy-db.

@rakita
Copy link
Member

rakita commented Oct 24, 2024

Have published new revm with bumped AlloyDB

@rakita rakita closed this as completed Oct 24, 2024
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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants