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

Test being added to an old epoch #94

Merged
merged 16 commits into from
Apr 20, 2023
Merged

Test being added to an old epoch #94

merged 16 commits into from
Apr 20, 2023

Conversation

Powersource
Copy link
Collaborator

@Powersource Powersource commented Apr 17, 2023

Fixes #86

  • remove the old todo comment

index.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@socket-security
Copy link

socket-security bot commented Apr 17, 2023

New dependency changes detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎


👍 No new dependency issues detected in pull request

Bot Commands

To ignore an alert, reply with a comment starting with @SocketSecurity ignore followed by a space separated list of package-name@version specifiers. e.g. @SocketSecurity ignore [email protected] bar@* or ignore all packages with @SocketSecurity ignore-all

Pull request alert summary
Issue Status
Install scripts ✅ 0 issues
Native code ✅ 0 issues
Bin script shell injection ✅ 0 issues
Unresolved require ✅ 0 issues
Invalid package.json ✅ 0 issues
HTTP dependency ✅ 0 issues
Git dependency ✅ 0 issues
Deprecated license ✅ 0 issues
Missing license ✅ 0 issues
Potential typo squat ✅ 0 issues
Known Malware ✅ 0 issues
Telemetry ✅ 0 issues
Protestware/Troll package ✅ 0 issues

📊 Modified Dependency Overview:

🚮 Removed packages: [email protected]

index.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.js Outdated
)
}),
// aggregate multiple readKeys from invites to different epochs into one invite object
pull.drain(
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this won't be very streamy now, but maybe that's ok for now since we're just getting it to work at first?

@Powersource Powersource marked this pull request as ready for review April 18, 2023 12:34
index.js Show resolved Hide resolved
@Powersource Powersource requested review from staltz, mixmix and arj03 April 18, 2023 12:35
@mixmix
Copy link
Member

mixmix commented Apr 18, 2023

reviewing now

Copy link
Member

@mixmix mixmix left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test is good. The multicb got under my skin so I did a little refactor I'd like to recommend instead:

Please see this PR @Powersource #96

@@ -40,10 +40,11 @@
"envelope-spec": "^1.1.1",
"fast-deep-equal": "^3.1.3",
"is-canonical-base64": "^1.1.1",
"jitdb": "^7.0.7",
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

had to add this as tests were failing when i pulled in master because of missing jitdb/operators dep. but when installing this i got

% pnpm add jitdb
Packages: +1
+
Progress: resolved 521, reused 521, downloaded 0, added 1, done

dependencies:
+ jitdb 7.0.7

 WARN  Issues with peer dependencies found
.
└─┬ jitdb 7.0.7
  └── ✕ missing peer async-append-only-log@^4.3.2
Peer dependencies that should be installed:
  async-append-only-log@^4.3.2

Done in 5.9s

things seem to work though

@mixmix

@Powersource Powersource merged commit 9039cc2 into master Apr 20, 2023
@Powersource Powersource deleted the added-to-old-epoch branch April 20, 2023 17:03
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Test getting added to an old epoch but still finding the newer epochs we've been re-added to
2 participants