| |
|---|
@Nikita Puzankov | Performed review of prepared PRs Started maintenance subscription mechanism implementation Performed refactoring of configuration for different modules, grouped parameters semantically Tomorrow will put all day into the requirements definition On Monday it will be nice to finalize the list of requirements with Ales, Makoto and all other stakeholders by reviewing list of epics
|
@Kamil Salakhiev | Performed several review of the PRs and Reusable Data Model document from @Михаил Болдырев @Михаил Болдырев > There is an idea of interoperability, which is already taken by one of our interns Currently, we are collecting all WSV in memory
There is also a proposal to change the synchronization mechanism from Egor, I have added some details about how it was performed in the first version
|
@Andrei Lebedev | I have some questions to the synchronization mechanism, too. I think it can be done easier. We need to stick to the existing working solutions to avoid the re-engineering of the same mechanics, especially if it is working correctly. Currently we cannot review everything in design. @Nikita Puzankov > Iroha 2 would not expected as a continuation of the Iroha 1 at the beginning. @Egor Ivkov > Synchronization mechanism was based on the WP from @武宮誠 when he mentioned "gossip" explicitly @Kamil Salakhiev > We need to get the input from Makoto to the RFC in the aim to finalize that
|
@Михаил Болдырев | Started SecuroSys HSM integration in the Iroha 1.2.0. Currently waiting answer from the support, as they are providing quite strange documentation. We need the feedback regarding the proposed data model interoperability between 1.x and 2.x
|
@Egor Ivkov | Finished initial block synchronization, created activity diagrams for the implemented feature. There is a new task for block validation corrections, which is important. Started with it. Also, will continue with the configuration improvement. Waiting for the feedback on the block sync RFC from @武宮誠 and C++ team Makoto once requested REST API with JSON, should we accept it? @Nikita Puzankov > It became outdated. We are going to prepare WASM library. @Kamil Salakhiev > We need to create the convenient JS library for the clients, ideally.
|
@Sara Garifullina | |