Yes that’s a very fair assumption - we can definitely improve ZIP1 prior to its submission to avoid having to update it at a later date
I see your point here - but in my view the ZIP process isn’t just for protocol change but any change that would require community consensus. Noting SYRIUS is the ‘official’ wallet, would we benefit from having a single official version rather than multiple community forks? I am not a dev so definitely keen for your input here (looking at this from a users perspective, multiple forks from different devs would be confusing)
Oh yes, you’re right, of course there are changes to znnd (go-zenon) possible that are not protocol updates. And I agree, every change to this code should require consensus. So that would also justify to have at least two categories (I’m not sure about a third?)
Still, this would concern the reference implementation of znnd.
We should also include necessary and zenonnetwork-owned libraries as well, i.e. libpow.
The difference between libpow and syrius then, is the direction of dependency. znnd requires libpow, syrius requires (not strictly, but to be useful) znnd.
znnd doesn’t care about syrius or any other client.
So yea, it’s the „official“ wallet, but it’s not important for the functioning of the network, so I would say changes don’t require consensus. Same thing as the explorer for example (literally)
ok thanks for providing more info - I might hit you up directly to flesh out some better options/naming and then post it back here for discussion?
Sure!
1 Like