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

Release new version of ethereumjs-util under new namespace @ethereumjs/util #1366

Closed
ryanio opened this issue Jul 19, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Comments

@ryanio
Copy link
Contributor

ryanio commented Jul 19, 2021

This is a tracking issue to deprecate ethereumjs-util and release under the new namespace @ethereumjs/util.

As part of this, we should also rename all internal monorepo references to the new package name for consistency.

@holgerd77
Copy link
Member

As much as I can understand this desire from a consistency perspective - this also hurts my eyes when seeing it 😋 - I honestly have to say: we shouldn't do this (yet).

As we have seen along this native-crypto-modules-removal work suggested and executed by @alcuadrado and others from Nomic Labs (see ethereum/js-team-organization#18 as well as execution PRs like ethereumjs/ethereumjs-util#261) the Util library has an extremely long update cycle with people sticking to old versions for years (some context here: Nomic Labs did the work and removed the native dependencies for the hashing (keccak) and signature (secp256k1) libraries for v4, v5 and v6 branches of the library. That was actually some heroic task dramatically improving the developer/installation experience for a vast amount of users).

With somewhat unnecessarily doing an update here we would loose another round of users which likely won't do the update for another 1-2 - maybe three years - just for the sake of a naming adjustment. And for eventual crypto (or other) related (emergency) bug fixes we have yet another major release cycle to care for. I would say that this price is very much too high for the win.

I would therefore suggest to close here. We can pick this up again (without the need for having an issue open until then) once we really have incentives to do breaking changes on the Util library.

@ryanio
Copy link
Contributor Author

ryanio commented Aug 3, 2021

ok, that makes sense to me, thanks for the explanation!

@ryanio ryanio closed this as completed Aug 3, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants