Skip to content

Create empty bitcoin-receive crate#2898

Closed
tcharding wants to merge 1 commit intorust-bitcoin:masterfrom
tcharding:06-24-bitcoin-receive
Closed

Create empty bitcoin-receive crate#2898
tcharding wants to merge 1 commit intorust-bitcoin:masterfrom
tcharding:06-24-bitcoin-receive

Conversation

@tcharding
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We intend on splitting the address types and logic out into a separate crate. In preparation for doing so, and so that we can grab the name on crates.io, add an empty crate bitcoin-receive.

Tie it in to the CI infrastructure.

@tcharding tcharding changed the title Create empty bitcoin-receive crate Create empty bitcoin-receive crate Jun 23, 2024
@tcharding
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

tcharding commented Jun 23, 2024

If/when this merges can you please publish to crates.io @apoelstra, I ran cargo publish -p bitcoin-receive --dry-run already.

We intend on splitting the address types and logic out into a separate
crate. In preparation for doing so, and so that we can grab the name on
crates.io, add an empty crate `bitcoin-receive`.

Tie it in to the CI infrastructure.
@Kixunil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Kixunil commented Jun 24, 2024

bitcoin-receive is supposed to be a name for address?

@tcharding
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Yep

@Kixunil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Kixunil commented Jun 24, 2024

That's a really sad name that doesn't suggest it's an address at all. I wish crate-based namespaces were a thing already...

@storopoli
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

That's a really sad name that doesn't suggest it's an address at all. I wish crate-based namespaces were a thing already...

I agree. When I stumbled upon this PR and seeing the title, I thought it was something P2P related.
Why not go straight for bitcoin-address?
Then the lib/crate would be something:

use bitcoin_address::Foo

which conveys the message even for newcomers into Rust and/or bitcoin.

@yancyribbens
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why not go straight for bitcoin-address?

Somebody already had bitcoin-address: #2883 (comment)

@Kixunil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Kixunil commented Jun 25, 2024

The least bad name I can think of is bitcoin-addresses, anyone got anything better?

@tcharding
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I'm down with that name, its nice also because of the other plurals units, internals, hashes. Maybe we should rename bitcoin to bitcoins 🤔

@tcharding
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Today's triggering is free of charge, you're welcome :)

@storopoli
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Well everyone in this industry treat the term "bitcoin" different.
I think we can go with addresses. It is way better than receive.

@Kixunil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Kixunil commented Jun 26, 2024

Oh yeah, I've just realized we have two address types so the plural is appropriate: Address<NetworkChecked> and Address<NetworkUnchecked>. (And for those who want to argue, no Address is not a type. It's a type constructor.)

@tcharding
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

An alternative to this that uses the crate name bitcoin-addresses is done in #2928

@apoelstra
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Yeah, agreed with the above, let's go with bitcoin-addresses.

@apoelstra
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I am a tiny bit worried about the existing unmaintained bitcoin-address getting sold and becoming a malicious fork of our bitcoin-addresses, and the similar names leading to people being burned. But a lot has to go wrong for that to happen and the crates.io people will help us out.

@apoelstra apoelstra closed this Jun 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants