Skip to content
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.

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

Simpler provider parameter handling on construction of a Web3 Module #2321

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

nivida
Copy link
Contributor

@nivida nivida commented Feb 4, 2019

Description

The goal of this PR is to simplify the provider handling. Currently, there are too many different possibilities we provide from the Web3.js library. In the future, there should be one clear path of how Web3.js should get initiated with the provider.

Related issues:
#2275

Type of change

  • Enhancement

Checklist:

  • I have selected the correct base branch.
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code.
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation.
  • My changes generate no warnings.
  • I have updated or added types for all modules I've changed
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules.
  • I ran npm run test in the root folder with success and extended the tests if necessary.
  • I ran npm run build in the root folder and tested it in the browser and with node.
  • I ran npm run dtslint in the root folder and tested that all my types are correct
  • I have tested my code on the live network.

@nivida nivida changed the title provider resolving simpllyified, documenation updated, types updated Handling of the provider parameter Feb 4, 2019
@nivida nivida changed the title Handling of the provider parameter Simpler provider parameter handling on construction of a Web3 Module Feb 4, 2019
@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
{
"name": "web3-utils",
"version": "1.0.0-beta.41",

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Its a little concerning that the lockfile would change like it does here without any corresponding changes to package.json, etc... Any idea what'd going on here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is because I've done a clean install and deleted all the package-lock.json files before. Will finish this work and release it ~beta.45

@nivida nivida added Enhancement Includes improvements or optimizations In Progress Currently being worked on labels Feb 19, 2019
@nivida nivida removed Enhancement Includes improvements or optimizations In Progress Currently being worked on labels Mar 5, 2019
@nivida nivida closed this Mar 5, 2019
@nivida nivida deleted the enhancement/provider-resolving branch March 5, 2019 17:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants