Remove protocol deps from pool crate
#1483
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1483 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 18.90% 19.32% +0.41%
==========================================
Files 134 131 -3
Lines 9521 9310 -211
==========================================
- Hits 1800 1799 -1
+ Misses 7721 7511 -210
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
|
||
| pub use binary_sv2::Error as BinaryError; | ||
| pub use binary_sv2::U256; | ||
| pub use binary_sv2::B064K; | ||
| pub use binary_sv2::B0255; | ||
|
|
||
| pub use codec_sv2::Error as CodecError; | ||
| pub use codec_sv2::framing_sv2::Error as FramingError; | ||
|
|
||
| pub use codec_sv2::Initiator; | ||
| pub use codec_sv2::Responder; | ||
| pub use codec_sv2::HandshakeRole; | ||
| pub use codec_sv2::noise_sv2::Error as NoiseError; | ||
|
|
||
| pub use codec_sv2::StandardEitherFrame; | ||
| pub use codec_sv2::StandardSv2Frame; | ||
|
|
||
| pub use const_sv2::MESSAGE_TYPE_CHANNEL_ENDPOINT_CHANGED; | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have a slightly different opinion on this—let me know what you think. Although roles-logic-sv2 is part of the protocol, it should have been placed in roles, considering that it primarily contains application-layer logic. The codec crate is the protocol crate, encapsulating lower-level foundational crates like binary, framing, noise, and const. To me, it makes sense to expose these from codec and then use them in roles-logic-sv2. That way, the hierarchy remains structured correctly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yea I agree with you. But roles logic is not part of the scope for this pr..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
referenced #1268 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jbesraa, my previous comment focused on exposing the binary, framing, noise, and const modules through the codec_sv2 crate, rather than the roles_logic_sv2 crate. This is independent of the roles_logic_sv2 refactoring. I've noticed other PR's relying on the assumption that these modules should be exposed via roles_logic_sv2. I believe we should carefully consider this design decision. My preference remains to expose them through codec_sv2.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you say why? roles_logic is the 'window' to the lower level crates, why would we fetch code from codec directly then?
jbesraa
force-pushed
the
2025-02-13/organise-deps-list
branch
from
59e0e20 to
3fc68a9
Compare
jbesraa
force-pushed
the
2025-02-13/organise-deps-list
branch
from
aa0446d to
b582577
Compare
|
This is ready for review |
jbesraa
force-pushed
the
2025-02-13/organise-deps-list
branch
3 times, most recently
from
ef80814 to
826d1d1
Compare
This also exports the needed structs/fns through `roles-logic-sv2`.
jbesraa
force-pushed
the
2025-02-13/organise-deps-list
branch
from
826d1d1 to
11c5c6f
Compare
Partially addresses #1458