Skip to content

Documentation #34

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 20 commits into from
Jun 29, 2021
Merged

Documentation #34

merged 20 commits into from
Jun 29, 2021

Conversation

cstml
Copy link

@cstml cstml commented Jun 23, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Please refer to issue #30 for the initial description.

@cstml cstml added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Jun 23, 2021
@cstml cstml self-assigned this Jun 23, 2021
@cstml cstml marked this pull request as draft June 23, 2021 09:37
@cstml cstml requested a review from Benjmhart June 23, 2021 09:38
@cstml cstml linked an issue Jun 23, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request
Add documentation for the proposed use cases #30
Closed
@cstml cstml changed the title *WIP* Documentation Documentation Jun 23, 2021
@cstml cstml mentioned this pull request Jun 23, 2021
Closed
@cstml
Copy link
Author

cstml commented Jun 23, 2021

@stackBlock, (pending thumbs up from @Benjmhart) this is the structure I create based on the IOHK requirements. Please pull the branch, update fields and (going forward) push to this branch - this way we can keep track of the progress in a transparent manner.

@Benjmhart please let me know if this is the structure you had in mind. If the feedback is too long to be put in writing, let's book a 10 minute conversation on Slack.

Benjmhart
Benjmhart approved these changes Jun 23, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Benjmhart Benjmhart left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks great.

@stackBlock
Copy link

stackBlock commented Jun 23, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Thank you all @cstml @Benjmhart for the clarifications. I have a few more questions...

  1. It looks like we are delivering Lendex and the NFT project to IOHK. They are currently in the plutus-use-case/mlabs folder. Are these two projects getting pulled out of this repository and getting a repository of their own for delivery to IOHK?
  2. Based on the documentation outline, It looks like (if they are getting their own repository / file) they will be in the same repository. Is this correct?
  3. Or, if they are staying where they are, are the docs just in reference to them? I ask because my own experience in getting them (Lendex and NFT) to compile / work has been challenging but ultimately successful but a little confusing because of the other projects in the repository that do not compile.

I will start working on the docs assuming they are staying where they are.
Thanks,
Anthony

@Benjmhart
Copy link
Member

@stackBlock
it's unclear at this time what IOHK will do with these, after we deliver the initial effort at the end of the month, we will be building the deployment story, as well as adding performance enhancements.
currently it's all going to their repo, this is why we have the mlabs folder to namespace our work a bit and avoid conflicts, confusingly there is also plutus-use-cases in the main plutus repo, it is possible that our work will eventually be merged there.

nrutledge and others added 7 commits June 23, 2021 11:23
@nrutledge
Update STANDARDS doc with latest changes from Koz
c59726a
@nrutledge
Merge pull request #43 from mlabs-haskell/standards-update
96227ca 
Update STANDARDS doc with latest changes from Koz
@stackBlock
install process work
817d7bb 
I have documented the install process up to the point that it works... there are some errors that need to be ironed out the we are having during the installation - There are some work arounds but I want to try to get it working the correct way.  
I implemented a new virtual machine and ran through the install process as I wrote this to make sure that everything up until running `make build` worked correctly. 
I just saw that @Benjmhart advised that we are keeping everything in this repo and I believe there is also a ticket in with IOHK to solve some of these issues. I will get with Ben and see how he wants me to proceed.
@jozanek
Run HLS from nix-shell.
6f833c3
@cstml
update: added TODO: tag + small changes
5a2b769 
- easily track incomplete information by looking for the TODO: tag.
@cstml
update: add links to specifications
75f029c
@cstml
update: remove typo
64ab8c0
@cstml
Copy link
Author

cstml commented Jun 24, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Good work on 817d7bb @stackBlock, a thorough way of going about it.

@Benjmhart, what would the best way to document achieved and future goals for the endpoints/APIs be? I haven't been involved in the development / previous conversations so I would be second guessing them.
Would going over them in a conversation with you or someone else be the best way?

@Benjmhart
Copy link
Member

Good work on 817d7bb @stackBlock, a thorough way of going about it.

@Benjmhart, what would the best way to document achieved and future goals for the endpoints/APIs be? I haven't been involved in the development / previous conversations so I would be second guessing them.
Would going over them in a conversation with you or someone else be the best way?

this is one of those nonsense questions where it doesn't even make sense to me.

The API has achieved feature-completeness, my understanding of our future goals are to work on the deployment story + performance during the next 2 months.

perhaps in the context of api, achieved goals are -it works as specified- and future goals are -none at this time- but with slightly less snark.

prutz1311
prutz1311 suggested changes Jun 24, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@prutz1311 prutz1311 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lendex and NFT have both 100% test coverage but no QuickCheck tests

@cstml
Copy link
Author

cstml commented Jun 24, 2021

Lendex and NFT have both 100% test coverage but no QuickCheck tests

Ok, cheers @prutz1311 for confirming, have included this.

@cstml
Copy link
Author

cstml commented Jun 25, 2021

Good work on 817d7bb @stackBlock, a thorough way of going about it.
@Benjmhart, what would the best way to document achieved and future goals for the endpoints/APIs be? I haven't been involved in the development / previous conversations so I would be second guessing them.
Would going over them in a conversation with you or someone else be the best way?

this is one of those nonsense questions where it doesn't even make sense to me.

The API has achieved feature-completeness, my understanding of our future goals are to work on the deployment story + performance during the next 2 months.

perhaps in the context of api, achieved goals are -it works as specified- and future goals are -none at this time- but with slightly less snark.

Cheers @Benjmhart, agreed.
Will integrate comments into the documentation

@cstml cstml marked this pull request as ready for review June 28, 2021 15:39
@cstml cstml requested a review from prutz1311 June 28, 2021 15:39
@cstml
Copy link
Author

cstml commented Jun 29, 2021

Received go ahead to merge.

@cstml cstml merged commit 192445c into main Jun 29, 2021
@cstml cstml deleted the documentation branch July 8, 2021 11:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Benjmhart Benjmhart Benjmhart approved these changes

@prutz1311 prutz1311 Awaiting requested review from prutz1311

Assignees

@cstml cstml

Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add documentation for the proposed use cases
6 participants
@cstml @stackBlock @Benjmhart @prutz1311 @jozanek @nrutledge