ah if only we knew that before we started we do like a challenge lol but yeh while the issues in routing / crust kind of blocked network related testing/progress during the sprint these issues were very much unexpected and are seemingly complex too since guys in those libraries are still working through them right now.
We havent yet chalked the network objective to the next sprint as there are currently a few things making this week quite hectic. To name a few, routing handover with ben leaving at the end of the week and getting andrew into the routing library with Brian. CRUST RFC that andrew has been working on which touches on quite an extent of the crust library for updates. This RFC itself again reduces code complexity a lot while also hopefully getting the library more rust language friendly. While both of these are ongoing this week, guys in the networking libraries are also working on the above mentioned bugs in CRUST and routing. Now if they end up getting resolved in the next few days, you guys will surely be the first to hear about it and we will accordingly try and get the vault library tied in to get the rust-5 deliverable out. If not, then with the handover complete, we’ll be prioritising on getting the networking layer solid to get the previously planned deliverable out before adding more intersecting features as you can expect.
By Drive, if you mean NFS (which isnt just the VFS portion), then yep and also the DNS crates. Launcher RFC lists the actions it currently supports from any app communicating with it.
Can answer these two together. Yes when new features are added in the core modules, the launcher API will also be extended to allow access to those features from apps communicating via the launcher. This will be with new RFC’s for discussion and implementation phases. As for documentation and guides/usage samples itself, you can expect that start making their way outside RFCs too, such as from the launcher repo documentation / dev site and so on…
We had the firefox addon compiled today from all three desktop platforms with the latest master branch of
safe_ffi. Maybe worth a try again to see if you’re still having issues Mark. @ustulation / @Krishna_Kumar should be able to help you out if you’re still having issues.
Think this might be soon actually. As mentioned in the update, you can expect a RFC from spandan which should propose the spec to get the launcher to support anonymous data access via the launcher. This should then remove the dependency the browser addons have on the
safe_ffi module and bring them to a similar footing to standard desktop apps.
Yep and none launcher pretty much disconnects the network workings/dependencies from app devs, so essentially when the mock network is replaced with the real network version, only thing that’d change is the launcher binary that which is run on the users machine. App code talking to the launcher will be identical but now with the new version data sent to the launcher by the app instead of getting stored locally in the machine will be sent to the network and retrieved from the network accordingly.