fryorcraken
fryorcraken
> Note that this RFC has been written with [https://github.com/kgrgpg/rln/blob/main/contracts/Rln.sol](https://github.com/kgrgpg/rln/blob/main/contracts/Rln.sol?rgh-link-date=2022-08-02T12%3A06%3A38Z) in mind. This will evolve as RLN contract implementation changes with time. Has anyone reviewed the solidity contract? I don't...
I wonder if the best way forward would be to create a nwaku PoC. According to the requirements above and from https://notes.status.im/waku-vac-devcon-2022# > Nimbus is interested in an easy way...
Fixed in 0.25.0
@jm-clius is gossip sub peer exchange support in nwaku? @kaiserd @jm-clius do we want to pursue this route or should I focus on https://rfc.vac.dev/spec/34/ first/instead?
In icebox as per comments above.
Protons is facing some performance issues: https://github.com/ipfs/protons/issues/51 The also haven't accepted the PR to align behaviour change with proto3: https://github.com/ipfs/protons/pull/48 Focus of this issue is still to have a tree-shakeable...
Check https://buf.build/blog/protobuf-es-the-protocol-buffers-typescript-javascript-runtime-we-all-deserve
Marked as good first issue because it does not involve knowledge of js-waku codebase, just knowledge of bundler and transpiler and other ci/build/test tools.
I would suggest to park this one for now and focus on getting waku.guide up and running first. Then it makes it easy to include guide link in the docs.
It seems there are some handles open, needs investigation: `Wait for remote peers` test: ``` [WTF Node?] open handles: - File descriptors: (note: stdio always exists) - fd 2 (stdio)...