-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 90
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 config file to rule them all and in cryptography bind them #147
Changes from 5 commits
4d687aa
0864d41
af6c425
724f178
45a94cc
0a46ea4
8211a04
098b3e6
e6ee6bc
e71b312
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ | ||
cosigner: | ||
threshold: 2 | ||
shares: 3 | ||
p2p-listen: tcp://127.0.0.1:2222 | ||
peers: | ||
- share-id: 1 | ||
p2p-addr: tcp://127.0.0.1:2222 | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Re UX: I'm wondering if there is any benefit to letting the user set the id. We could use the index of the array as the id. However, if the user re-orders the array, I'm not sure what would happen. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The name In the code (like error messages) it indicates peer id and in the documentation it indicates cosigner id. The code and docs do not mention a "share id". I'm good with either but not both. We need consistency across the code, config, and documentation. In the config, I'm in favor of simply There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. from our discussion off GH, we talked about having these be |
||
- share-id: 2 | ||
p2p-addr: tcp://127.0.0.1:2223 | ||
- share-id: 3 | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if we remove this flag completely. The format is unorthodox and tricky to read. Given the necessary complexity of multiple signers, I'm in favor of forcing a config file. Any thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Flags are switched around a bit now.
--peers
/-p
replaced by string slice--cosigner
/-c
. The delimiter is removed. The order in which the-c
flags are used determines shard ID 1->n.args[0]
csv for chain nodes replaced by string slice flag--node
/-n
. This makes it easier to string-n
flags together for multiple chain nodeprivValAddr
.--mode
(string, either default-threshold
orsingle
) replaces-c
.