Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 8, 2023. It is now read-only.

Sprint E #6

Closed
4 of 22 tasks
jbenet opened this issue Apr 27, 2015 · 8 comments
Closed
4 of 22 tasks

Sprint E #6

jbenet opened this issue Apr 27, 2015 · 8 comments

Comments

@jbenet
Copy link
Member

jbenet commented Apr 27, 2015

Sprint Goals

  1. Wire protocol + interop with node
  2. Make gateways faster / better
  3. Perf + Bugfixes

Sprint Participants - @jbenet @dylanPowers @whyrusleeping @travisperson @wking @cryptix

Sprint Deliverables

@jbenet
Copy link
Member Author

jbenet commented Apr 27, 2015

@wking + @krl -- still need to add things for you this week-- chat briefly on irc?

@wking
Copy link
Contributor

wking commented Apr 28, 2015

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 01:25:46PM -0700, Juan Batiz-Benet wrote:

@wking + @krl -- still need to add things for you this week…

[ ] organize filesystem node creation and extraction in shell/fsnode
and core/fsnode, deprecating the existing importer and
core/coreunix interfaces and migrating the internal use to the new
interfaces. I may only get through the addition commands this
week (WIP in ipfs/kubo#1151. This is part of a larger push to
clean up the existing file handling before working on access modes
(more discussion in ipfs/kubo#846).

I'd like to open an issue to figure out our migration strategy. Do we
need ‘gofix’ style translators? Should we be logging runtime
deprecation warnings? Some folks do some sed-like things with ‘go
fmt’. Maybe we're just explaining migrations in our release notes?
Anyhow, it would be good to have a plan written up somewhere, but I'm
not sure where that place is. Ideas?

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

@wking deprecating importer? in favor of what?

In my perfect awesome world where I wrote all the code and spent lots of time making the interfaces perfect, We would have the importer, with all its knobs and switches on the low end (probably), and coreunix.Add being all nice and user friendly on top, and then the commands.Add would just call into coreunix.Add.

I guess the further refinement of that idea is that all commands are just UX wrappers over the core* methods, and the core* methods handle a bunch of logic in order to make calls to the low level importer style, raw methods.

maybe we should rename core -> mantle, and call the lowest level type API commands the core...

Maybe i'm crazy, @jbenet @wking thoughts on this?

@jbenet
Copy link
Member Author

jbenet commented Apr 28, 2015

@travisperson for "scope out how testing will be done on both webui and api" if you can propose a system or two i can review it and suggest changes. maybe in: ipfs/ipfs-webui#38

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

potential issues to address next sprint:
ipfs/kubo#1082
ipfs/kubo#1050
ipfs/kubo#964
ipfs/kubo#1179
ipfs/kubo#1150

In general, try to do something with ipfs, record difficulties, try and fix them

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

I would also like to get more testing around ipns and path resolution written, testing various commands with different path syntax (/ipfs/ vs vs /ipns/)

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

and this jbenet/go-peerstream#5 also needs to get done

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants