[bisq-network/proposals] Use a GRPC API as core API and use wrappers around for other API types (#136)

chimp1984 notifications at github.com
Tue Nov 12 00:00:33 UTC 2019


@blabno 

> Does that include transitive dependencies?
Sure all big libraries will have more transitive dependencies but I think a library provided from Google is less risky than other less prominent libraries. 

> untangling the core and desktop and making some of the core operations sort of stateless

I did that for placeOffer now in about 3 hours. It was not a complex and challenging task. I don't see why that could not have been done by any other developer. It is trivial refactoring be moving methods from Desktop to a Core class.

> Finally we've got some initial version accepted into incubator.
We have to re-discuss the incubator idea. I think it is with our current dev setup not feasible. It would require a Bisq maintainer to do the merge and reviews otherwise it is the same as it is on the developers repo but have the tough to be official Bisq as living inside the Bisq repo and can cause risks that users trust that it was reviewed and audited by Bisq maintainer but it was not. So I think the current setup is completely broken. 

> The bottleneck are the maintainers.
Yes lack of developers is a big problem. I think we should keep the core Bisq app as minimal as possible to get out of that bottleneck problem and make it easy for others to use the Bisq core project for their sub-projects. Then all those problems are easier to handle. If you are the project owner of the HTTP API and use the official GRPC API as basic and wrap around whatever you want you don't need permission and you don't feel blocked by busy maintainers. For users of your HTTP API it is clear that this is a side project and not Bisq core and that need to be clearly communicated (e.g. by an altered logo, name etc). Also for Bisq maintainers it is easier when they release a new version that they do not need to test and maintain additional code base. It is like anyone forks Bisq, they are responsible to stay up to date with the root project.
Compensation can still be done if the BSQ stakeholder find such a side project valuable. We also fund Tor relay operators so this aspect should have too much influence in that discussion IMO.


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/136#issuecomment-552672489
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20191111/8623cc3e/attachment.html>


More information about the bisq-github mailing list