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

discussion: should we adopt the Cargo-minimal.lock and Cargo-recent.lock approach ? #1551

Open
oleonardolima opened this issue Aug 13, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
new feature New feature or request

Comments

@oleonardolima
Copy link
Contributor

Describe the enhancement

As mentioned in payjoin/rust-payjoin#337, it's way clearer having a Cargo.lock file than having the pinned dependencies only on the README and CI.

In rust-bitcoin it follows a different approach that might be helpful and clearer, opening this issue for start a discussion about it.

Use case

Adds Cargo-minimal.lock and Cargo-recent.lock files for clearer pinned dependencies and MSRV support.

Additional context

Please refer to payjoin/rust-payjoin#337 and rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#1764

@oleonardolima oleonardolima added the new feature New feature or request label Aug 13, 2024
@storopoli
Copy link
Contributor

Yes, I think that all mission-critical rust software should adopt a Cargo.lock to pin dependencies.
That would also help a lot the Nix CI stuff.
Actually if you need a Cargo.lock that works with MSRV #1320 has it.

@oleonardolima
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've been thinking about this. I guess a good initial approach would be to apply these to other crates, such as: rust-esplora-client, rust-electrum-client, and rust-hwi first and validate the benefits, before doing an "overhaul" here.

@notmandatory notmandatory added this to the 1.0.0-beta milestone Aug 22, 2024
@notmandatory notmandatory removed this from the 1.0.0-beta milestone Sep 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
new feature New feature or request
Projects
Status: Discussion
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants