Josh

Is there an update to this problem? I understand that https://stackoverflow.com/a/70128576/8784518 provides a workaround solution (setting the value of an undesired field to `undefined`), but the resulting object still contains...

There's a comment about it here: https://gitlab.com/MatrixAI/Engineering/Polykey/polykey-design/-/issues/31#note_495622490. This is the only further information I could find.

Recall our current node to node claim signing process, where we perform a cooperative signing process between both nodes, passing two claims back and forth between the nodes such that...

When we start to look into this, it would also be worthwhile to consider improving the field names on our claims. Currently, we have the data in a node claim...

* https://github.com/MatrixAI/js-encryptedfs/issues/55 would resolve this issue.

Originally I was seeing this as quite low priority, and so not necessary for the feature freeze. But this might actually be quite useful for our own usage of Polykey...

I've been writing up some of my own thoughts on vault and file schemas in our MR for vaults refactoring https://gitlab.com/MatrixAI/Engineering/Polykey/js-polykey/-/merge_requests/205#note_689647018. I'll synthesise my thoughts, and bring them into here...

When considering vault schemas, I've been thinking about what the "intention" of a vault is. I've thought of a few different approaches to this: ### 1. A "relational database"-like structure...

My perspective on these 3 options: 1. This doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me. Given that a big part of Polykey is being able to share vaults,...

So this means a directory would also have its own vault schema applied to it? For example, we could have a vault schema which specifies some files and a directory,...