This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 10, 2020. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 124
Revisit exposed DHT API #136
Labels
Comments
The DHT API test suite is small too, it should be way more comprehensive, we will get it ! :) |
35 tasks
Worth nothing is that the current DHT tests sometimes are not really testing anything. Looking at this file https://github.com/ipfs/interface-ipfs-core/blob/bad70aca3816b98eb88846183af404202a047055/js/src/dht.js, you can see that for example |
@vasco-santos has done a bunch of work on this:
Can we consider this done @daviddias? |
Sounds good to me! |
ghost
removed
the
ready
label
Dec 11, 2018
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
The data types of the return values can be vastly improved + more valuable information can be provided. Currently js-ipfs is fulfilling the contract that was brought into the spec through go-ipfs + js-ipfs-api, but there is nothing stopping us from making it better.
There are also some questions with regards if we should be able to provide a block we don't have. go-ipfs let's you do it, js-ipfs wasn't letting.
Due to time constraints, I'll focus on DHT internals that are used for peerRouting and contentRouting, so that we don't touch too much at surface API and fulfil our goal of having DHT used by internals.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: