Closed kayabaNerve closed 6 months ago
Seems reasonable to me, the move seems to be more centralized codebase vs. more independent crates/modules. I do think this repo is essentially unmonitored, thus an issue on the SDK is likely to get more eyes. Linking to this one is probably best to crossref IMHO
substrate-bip39
, by name, is BIP-39 for substrate. While substrate used to have its own repo, which I'd then requestsubstrate-bip39
to be included under if it was still around, substrate now lives under thepolkadot-sdk
monorepo.I don't see why substrate-dedicated repos should exist outside the monorepo. It places less attention on them and requires multiple PRs to trigger updates. While this code is largely stagnant (possibly in some part due to lack of attention), which minimizes how often said multiple PRs occur, I have had to write updates for it and it's personally annoying to have to maintain forks of
substrate-bip39
andpolkadot-sdk
. I wouldn't raise this request over solely the personal annoyance though, and believe it legitimately proper to be in monorepo.Please note
sp-core
does includesubstrate-bip39
(optional, yet included via thestd
feature) and this is accordingly a tightly bound library.Apologies if I should've made the issue under polkadot-sdk to adopt this repo, instead of making the issue here to be moved.