Should I abandon `cosmos-sdk-proto` and point people at `ibc-proto` instead?

[tony-iqlusion]

The two projects duplicate each others' functionality, but ibc-proto seems more mature at this point.

I find the whole situation a bit confusing and frustrating: ibc-proto has a much bigger scope than just IBC, and is instead a full Cosmos SDK Protobuf library.

cosmos-sdk-proto also has more downloads and a "Used by" count of 661 (whereas that number isn't populated for ibc-proto-rs for whatever reason). Just by virtue of its name it's more discoverable.

But I find duplication of effort to be incredibly demotivating.

[romac]

Hi Tony! Thanks for starting this discussion, I absolutely agree that the current situation is really subpar and we should aim to improve it.

How about I spend some time this week investigating whether we can deduplicate work by:

• Removing the Cosmos SDK protos from ibc-proto and instead use cosmos-sdk-proto as external definition for those.
• Removing the IBC protos from cosmos-sdk-proto and advise users to depend explicitly on ibc-proto if they need those

Would that seem like a good course of action to you? Is there something else you think should be done to remediate the current situation?

[tony-iqlusion]

That approach seems fine to me.

I think ideally they'd be in the same repo to synchronize changes, but if that's the direction you'd like to go, I'm happy to work toward that in whatever manner.

[tony-iqlusion]

With #187 open I'll go ahead and close this

[romac]

👍 Shall I open a PR on cosmos-rust so we can discuss there how best to proceed with all this?

[tony-iqlusion]

Yep, absolutely