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

light-client: consolidate and delete old implementations #437

Closed
xla opened this issue Jul 10, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #500
Closed

light-client: consolidate and delete old implementations #437

xla opened this issue Jul 10, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #500
Labels
enhancement New feature or request light-client Issues/features which involve the light client

Comments

@xla
Copy link
Contributor

xla commented Jul 10, 2020

With the advent of the light-client crate, which was meant to superseed prior implementations we now have a large corpus of code that is outdated and should be sun-setted. Keep maintaining this parts like lite and lite_impl is gonna add significant overhead that is unnecessary at this stage of the project.

These modules should be carefully evaluated to extract knowledge, implementation details which are worth preserving w.r.t. #416.

@xla xla added enhancement New feature or request light-client Issues/features which involve the light client labels Jul 10, 2020
@xla
Copy link
Contributor Author

xla commented Jul 10, 2020

@yihuang @joe-bowman this could be relevant to you.###

@liamsi
Copy link
Member

liamsi commented Jul 10, 2020

I'm strongly in favour of this. While @ebuchman rightfully mentioned that other projects are already using the lite module (cc @yihuang @joe-bowman), I think it will start being confusing with the next release (there is lite, lite_impl, light-client, light-node etc).

Also, I already added a ⚠️ ️deprecation warning ⚠️ in one the last releases:https://github.com/informalsystems/tendermint-rs/blob/master/CHANGES.md#0140-2020-06-19

Note, that there already is a related issue #342 (we might want to deduplicate the deduplication issues too).

These modules should be carefully evaluated to extract knowledge, implementation details which are worth preserving w.r.t. #416.

I agree that the current lite module might help inform the steps towards #416 but I think it could be OK to have this captured here and in version control instead of keeping the code around.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request light-client Issues/features which involve the light client
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants