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

High-level comments on major files #1

Closed
maxtaco opened this issue Jan 11, 2015 · 0 comments
Closed

High-level comments on major files #1

maxtaco opened this issue Jan 11, 2015 · 0 comments

Comments

@maxtaco
Copy link
Contributor

maxtaco commented Jan 11, 2015

Issue by maxtaco
Wednesday Oct 08, 2014 at 19:46 GMT
Originally opened as https://github.com/keybase/go-libkb/issues/2


Comments needed on the major libraries, like globals.go and interfaces.go.

@maxtaco maxtaco added this to the Major feature parity milestone Jan 11, 2015
@maxtaco maxtaco closed this as completed Jan 11, 2015
maxtaco added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 24, 2015
Try yet another strategy for packing arguments in Msgpack RPC.
All arguments are of the form [{params}], and therefore
are listed by name.  This is true for 0, 1, and 2+
length argument lists.  The same consistent format
is used in all.

The issue with the array-based approach is that it's pretty
fragile if arguments are added or deprecated.

cc: @gabriel
maxtaco added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 21, 2017
maxtaco added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 21, 2017
maxtaco added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 11, 2018
- the way the auditor is written, we don't actually need intermediate subchains to start with unstubbed links
- we still need link #1 to be unstubbed
maxtaco added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 11, 2018
- the way the auditor is written, we don't actually need intermediate subchains to start with unstubbed links
- we still need link #1 to be unstubbed
strib added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 14, 2019
Otherwise a valid TLF name like "a,b (conflicted copy 2019-02-14 #1)"
becomes "a,b (conflicted copy 2019-02-14 #1),a" and everything breaks.
strib added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 22, 2019
Otherwise a valid TLF name like "a,b (conflicted copy 2019-02-14 #1)"
becomes "a,b (conflicted copy 2019-02-14 #1),a" and everything breaks.
strib added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 25, 2019
Otherwise a valid TLF name like "a,b (conflicted copy 2019-02-14 #1)"
becomes "a,b (conflicted copy 2019-02-14 #1),a" and everything breaks.
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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant