-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 516
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
Aries 36 and 37 v1, demo/workshop updates to match #164
Aries 36 and 37 v1, demo/workshop updates to match #164
Conversation
Signed-off-by: sklump <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: sklump <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: sklump <[email protected]>
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #164 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 73.45% 71.72% -1.73%
==========================================
Files 188 217 +29
Lines 8230 9819 +1589
==========================================
+ Hits 6045 7043 +998
- Misses 2185 2776 +591 |
…review Signed-off-by: sklump <[email protected]>
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.
Reviewed the changes and ran the demo. All good. Still need to run the API demo.
I question if we want to use the temporary names at all. My preference would be that we flag the 0.1 as deprecated as soon as we are comfortable and use the names of the new protocols as they will be in the long run. If there is a name collision between the two protocols, we deal with it on a case by case basis. I would think we tend to backwards compatibility, unless it really screws up the long run handling.
I guess we accept this PR and then follow up quickly to change the names.
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
incorporating latest available updates from hyperledger/master