ssbc
Added a new example that seamlessly works across 2 different machines.
These two files work together to form one example of how to communicate across machines.
This is a nice simple example. It's not a test per-se (as in we wouldn't run it as part of automated tests) I wonder if it could be converted into a single file that behaves as a test and whether that would be useful.
Can you speak more to why you wanted this @nuttwork ?
I agree with you about it being unsuitable for a test in the current form. I looked at other modules such as ssb-minimal-pub-server, ssb-client-basic, etc. and none have an example that works across machines, so I wrote one up...
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 5:38 PM mix irving @.***> wrote:
This is a nice simple example. It's not a test per-se (as in we wouldn't run it as part of automated tests) I wonder if it could be converted into a single file that behaves as a test and whether that would be useful.
Can you speak more to why you wanted this @nuttwork https://github.com/nuttwork ?
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ssbc/secret-stack/pull/84#issuecomment-1486045577, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APR4L55RGSSQN4IT3N6GIFLW6IXJXANCNFSM6AAAAAAWB7JQUA . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>
If it's an example not a test, should we make a new examples directory with this inside?
