We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Hey,
I noticed that Piecrust and Rusk seem to have different version constraints for rkyv:
rkyv
Rusk: https://github.com/dusk-network/rusk/blob/d1bcaa2fb282c56748baeb3ef5dd9d5e3086ca4e/Cargo.toml#L120
Piecrust:
piecrust/piecrust/Cargo.toml
Line 21 in 2a8e0b4
Out of curiosity, but would it make sense to use the same version across repos here or does it not matter at all?
--
Additionally, I also noticed that rkyv recently released a new major version 0.8 that breaks backward compatibility.
Could this lead to any potential issues later down the line if you planned to upgrade with existing data?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@autholykos @HDauven @miloszm
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
Hey,
I noticed that Piecrust and Rusk seem to have different version constraints for
rkyv
:Rusk:
https://github.com/dusk-network/rusk/blob/d1bcaa2fb282c56748baeb3ef5dd9d5e3086ca4e/Cargo.toml#L120
Piecrust:
piecrust/piecrust/Cargo.toml
Line 21 in 2a8e0b4
(while 0.7.43 is the latest release of 0.7 series)
Out of curiosity, but would it make sense to use the same version across repos here or does it not matter at all?
--
Additionally, I also noticed that
rkyv
recently released a new major version 0.8 that breaks backward compatibility.Could this lead to any potential issues later down the line if you planned to upgrade with existing data?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: