-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
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
Rebrand to Checker Node. Closes #676 #677
Conversation
checker
. Closes #676
IIRC, we used to have the concept of two kinds of modules - a "trusted module" where we run a precompiled binary provided by the subnet (e.g. Saturn L2 node) and "trustless module" where we run JavaScript/WASM in Zinnia runtime. I agree with using the term "runtime" for the Zinnia runtime binary (zinniad). Are trusted subnets something to support in the new naming? |
Good point, I've made the decision in this PR that there will only be subnet source files and runtimes. This architecture would be nice as only open source modules can be run. I'm not sure if this decision is correct, but at the same time it makes things easier. Before, we were calling Zinnia a module of Station, and Spark a module of Zinnia (but defined in Station, not Zinnia). This encapsulation was confusing as I was looking over the code. Since the changes here are relatively simple, and we don't plan to add native / trusted subnets, I suggest we go ahead. |
We have agreed to also add migration logic to this repository |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
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.
The changes look reasonable to me. I have a few comments to discuss, PTAL 👇🏻
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.
LGTM with one comment about README which I think you already resolved.
Great job! 👏🏻
Understood! But: There's no else condition here, and the if body is small. In other cases I would agree with your reasoning and implement it the same way. I can't put into words atm why I find it worse in cases like this. I think mainly that if condition itself is easy to read this way, the proposed one makes me think more |
For #676
Blocks CheckerNetwork/desktop#2049
Renames:
Before, we were using "module" both for binaries like Zinnia and sources like "spark". Since part of the rebrand is to rename module to subnet, I split up this term into runtime and subnet, to avoid any confusion.
After merge
node