feat: initial update to the changelog for 0.5.0 #6977
Conversation
Stebalien
force-pushed
the
feat/update-releaselog
branch
from
2461d6c
to
2b7ec5b
Compare
Stebalien
force-pushed
the
feat/update-releaselog
branch
from
2b7ec5b
to
31a1342
Compare
| a bunch of important errata. But it's _definitely_ missing a _ton_ of shiny new | ||
| features. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove the word "missing" - it took me 3 reads to understand it is the doc that is missing features, and not the RC itself that got cut back.
| a bunch of important errata. But it's _definitely_ missing a _ton_ of shiny new | |
| features. | |
| a bunch of important errata. But it _definitely_ does not come close | |
| to fully describe the _ton_ of shiny new features. |
| 2. The DHT query logic doesn't properly terminate when it hits the end of the | ||
| query and, instead, aggressively keeps on searching. | ||
| 3. The routing tables are poorly maintained. This can cause a search that should | ||
| be logarithmic in the size of the network to be linear. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| be logarithmic in the size of the network to be linear. | |
| scale logarithmicaly with the network size, to slow down linearly instead. |
| 3. The routing tables are poorly maintained. This can cause a search that should | ||
| be logarithmic in the size of the network to be linear. | ||
|
|
||
| ###### Reachable |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: for an operator this section reads as "ugh... I might not like that". I would recommend reordering the reachability concern to be last: this way one reads about 2 no brainer good solutions first, and then encounters this section.
| * Keeping peers in the routing table, even if we get disconnected from them. | ||
| * Actively and frequently querying the DHT to keep our routing table full. | ||
|
|
||
| ##### Testing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should go to the top somewhere - not-so-technical operators want to know "we've done our homework" first and foremost
| bytes can be addressed using (a) two different versions of CIDs (CIDv1 and | ||
| CIDv2) and (b) with different "codecs" depending on how we're interpreting the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| bytes can be addressed using (a) two different versions of CIDs (CIDv1 and | |
| CIDv2) and (b) with different "codecs" depending on how we're interpreting the | |
| bytes can be addressed using (a) two different versions of CIDs (CIDv0 and | |
| CIDv1) and (b) with different "codecs" depending on how we're interpreting the |
|
Ah, sorry, I merged this without seeing your review. Could you put your changes into a PR? |
No description provided.