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

One crate #225

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Jun 4, 2024
Merged

One crate #225

merged 12 commits into from
Jun 4, 2024

Conversation

diehuxx
Copy link
Contributor

@diehuxx diehuxx commented Jun 3, 2024

Consolidate all crates into one. In a future PR, we will probably want to more neatly export specific items and un-nest some items from their deeply nested modules, rather than just pub moding everything. But this PR is just to move us to one crate with minimal changes.

* main:
  update timestamps (#222)
@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ impl Default for LocalKeyManager {

#[cfg(test)]
mod tests {
use crate::key::Key;
use crate::keys::key::Key;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

later on we can think of a different names if people see this when they import from kotlin or something 😆

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sha2 = "0.10.8"
simple-dns = "0.7.0"
ssi-core = "0.1.0"
ssi-dids = "0.1.1"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we still use this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yep, we're using ssi-dids and ssi-core for our did:web and did:jwk.

Copy link
Contributor

@nitro-neal nitro-neal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Awesome, wasn't as bad as I thought it would be.

I wonder how large our binding is for the entire web5 create (and js wasm size)

May be worth to do some work and record the binding size when we get back into bindings. can see the starting baseline size

Diane Huxley added 2 commits June 3, 2024 12:53
@diehuxx diehuxx merged commit 3551742 into main Jun 4, 2024
6 checks passed
@diehuxx diehuxx deleted the one-crate branch June 4, 2024 00:23
uniffi = { version = "0.27.1", features = ["cli"] }

[build-dependencies]
uniffi = { version = "0.27.1", features = ["build"] }

[lib]
crate-type = ["cdylib"]
name = "web5"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI this is relevant to the binding scripts #227

@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ impl JsonSchemaBuilder {
mod tests {
use std::collections::HashSet;

use test_helpers::TestVectorFile;
use crate::test_helpers::TestVectorFile;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@diehuxx thoughts on

  • crates/
    • test_helpers
    • web5

?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or, thoughts on simply

  • core/
    • src/
    • Cargo.toml
    • etc.

Meaning, just lean hard into only a single crate?

Any of the above three are fine because the compiler will handle performance matters, so it's purely cosmetic, just ideating

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants