-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 290
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
docs: draft ADR 023 #4034
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
docs: draft ADR 023 #4034
Conversation
I'm not sure what to add here. My next step is to repeat module extraction for the remaining state machine modules so maybe we can potentially merge this as-is and then I can update it when I resume work on the prototype after all the state machine modules are extracted. |
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.
Thanks @rootulp for writing this up. I think this is a good start and we can add to it as necessary. For example, this misses details on:
- How the protobuf registry will work in this setup or any other globally defined variables
- How ABCI might change (i.e. when we use a later version of the SDK we might have VoteExtensions and FinalizeBlock)
It would also be nice if your diagram showed a venn diagram of modules i.e. v3 can have overlap but also a different subset of modules.
Also in practice v1, v2 and v3 will probably be rolled together as a single state machine and v4 will be a different set of dependencies etc.
Two variants on the current design proposed by @tac0turtle: |
Also added a new module exclusively for v4
Agreed, added those questions to the ADR.
Added a module unique to v4.
Good call, updated the diagram to v3 and v4. |
Related to #3729