This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 12, 2024. It is now read-only.
Closed
Conversation
Member
|
#2094 is a step towards the idea put forwards in this PR and supercedes much of the work here already. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is the start of an effort to standardise the way we propagate and deal with errors.
The objective here is to remove event emitters, as we're only using them to propagate errors during instantiation. Moving
bootthat's inside the IPFS constructor to a factory method that returns a promise is a step towards that.The discussion started in #1325, but check #1325 (comment) and #1325 (comment) as to why.
This will be a breaking change and apps using ipfs will probably have to be refactored, so that's why we should offer backwards compatibility for some time, to allow developers to update their code.