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

Add support for postgres wallet type #553

Closed
TimoGlastra opened this issue Nov 28, 2021 · 7 comments
Closed

Add support for postgres wallet type #553

TimoGlastra opened this issue Nov 28, 2021 · 7 comments

Comments

@TimoGlastra
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 7, 2022

Hi @TimoGlastra I am working on adding support for Postgres
My approach is the same as this postgres-plugin/nodejs

@TimoGlastra
Copy link
Contributor Author

That's great @sairanjitAW!

@swcurran
Copy link
Contributor

swcurran commented Apr 7, 2022

Not that I want to discourage any efforts in building the platform, but is this a good use of time? This implies using AFJ on the server-side. AFAIK there is a fair amount still to add to AFJ to make it useful/scalable for operation on a server platform. Is there a reason not to push that effort into ACA-Py for server-side uses and focus AFJ efforts towards mobile functionality?

@TimoGlastra
Copy link
Contributor Author

I strongly disagree with this, and we're really interested in building out AFJ as a platform for both mobile and server side use cases. ACA-Py has had A LOT more investment for server side applications, but there's multiple reasons why we're interested in using AFJ for the server side (Being able to share the same codebase and protocols between environments, AFJ is more strictly typed which is a big + IMO, TS is a very popular language, a lot more libraries available in TS for SSI/Blockchain related projects than python, etc...).

So I'd definitely say this is a good use of time!

@swcurran
Copy link
Contributor

swcurran commented Apr 7, 2022

Sounds good! Happy with that answer. :-)

@genaris
Copy link
Contributor

genaris commented Apr 7, 2022

I strongly disagree with this, and we're really interested in building out AFJ as a platform for both mobile and server side use cases. ACA-Py has had A LOT more investment for server side applications, but there's multiple reasons why we're interested in using AFJ for the server side (Being able to share the same codebase and protocols between environments, AFJ is more strictly typed which is a big + IMO, TS is a very popular language, a lot more libraries available in TS for SSI/Blockchain related projects than python, etc...).

So I'd definitely say this is a good use of time!

+1 to Timo's words. For small teams it could be very beneficial to be able to share the same code base and use a single language/toolchain, especially when implementing custom features such as specific protocols over DIDComm. Also I like the 'framework' approach in terms that Agent class can be easily embedded within an existing application instead of using a separate module for handling Aries stuff.

@TimoGlastra
Copy link
Contributor Author

Fixed

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

3 participants