search

ipfs / kubo

An IPFS implementation in Go
https://docs.ipfs.tech/how-to/command-line-quick-start/
Other
16.05k stars 3.01k forks source link

Cleanup Experimental Features #9396

Open guseggert opened 1 year ago

guseggert commented 1 year ago

This is a tracking issue for experimental features we need to either remove or promote to non-experimental. Anything that's been sitting in "experimental" status for > 6 months is game here.

See: https://github.com/ipfs/kubo/blob/master/docs/experimental-features.md

guseggert commented 1 year ago

Filestore, ex https://github.com/ipfs/kubo/issues/9396

guseggert commented 1 year ago

From https://discuss.ipfs.tech/t/experimental-features-should-graduate-some-day/16155:

  • Raw leaves for unixfs files: even if not enabled by default, it should not be called experimental, just like CIDv1 is not.
  • Private Networks: I’m not even sure why it says it needs more documentation. Certainly more UX (like having a command or an init flag is not much work. pnets are widely used.
  • Plugins: the roadmap is too demanding since it does not even depend on Kubo. No one is going to invest in making plugins seriously if Kubo can come and decide one day that this won’t be a thing.
  • Directory sharding / HAMT: this is now default? Why is it marked as experimental?
  • AutoRelay: If we have relay v2, can we remove this from the experimental feature list? Isn’t relay v2 hole punching a code that is meant to stay even if not enabled by default?
  • Graphsync: I don’t quite understand that “next-gen graph exchange” is already dead.
  • Noise: it is not experimental, enabled by default
  • Accelerated DHT client: used anywhere where there is more than a trivial amount of CIDs needed to be annouced to the DHT. Is there a commitment to support this?
guseggert commented 1 year ago

Accelerated DHT client: https://github.com/ipfs/kubo/issues/9703

aschmahmann commented 1 year ago

A few easier ones to cleanup from https://github.com/ipfs/kubo/blob/master/docs/experimental-features.md