-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
refactor ens-deployments package (now datasources) & usage #792
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
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: dd0de1c The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
lightwalker-eth
left a comment
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.
@shrugs Hey nice updates 👍 Reviewed and shared suggestions. Please merge when ready 🙌
|
once again suggesting the replacement of L1Chain and associated words with ENS namespace and ENSNamespace. the language around using L1Chain is verbose and confusing, and it seems extremely clear to me that what we're discriminating between, at the top-level, is isolated ENS namespaces, not "L1s that host the root registry". as you said yourself there could be another deployment of ENS to mainnet, and ENSNode could technically support it — it's not the L1 that is the unique discriminator, it's the ENS namespace itself (and its associated contract addresses etc) that we're switching between. the i.e. just replacing the word "deployment" with "namespace", no other logical changes. i don't know, this seems extremely clear to me, but perhaps i'm missing something? |
lightwalker-eth
left a comment
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.
@shrugs Hey super updates here 😄 Reviewed and shared a few ideas 👍
|
i'm in favor of not using the datasource/instance terminology, i don't see the specific need for it |
lightwalker-eth
left a comment
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.
@shrugs Very happy. Awesome updates that help to simplify the mental model a lot!
lightwalker-eth
left a comment
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.
A few other little ideas 👍 @shrugs Please decide as you wish.
|
i've gone with the verbose but explicit |
|
and i've refactored the global config usage out of the ponder-helper and plugin-helpers for better separation of concerns |
closes #790
@ensnode/ens-deploymentsto@ensnode/datasourcesgetDatasourceMapandgetDatasourceENSNamespacetype and value using POJO to make public API easier to usenamespaceconcept renamed topluginNamespaceDeployment->DatasourceMap