move pmtree into zk-kit

privacy-scaling-explorations / zk-kit.rust

A monorepo of reusable crates for zero-knowledge technologies.

https://privacy-scaling-explorations.github.io/zk-kit.rust/

MIT License

10 stars 7 forks source link

move pmtree into zk-kit #53

Closed wiasliaw closed 2 days ago

wiasliaw commented 3 weeks ago

Description

Closes #4.

Other information

This PR moved pmtree into zk-kit. Some of the information should be check:

[x] License: There are two different LICENSE in pmtree and need to confirm whether to use the MIT license or follow pmtree's license.
[x] README: Since zk-kit-pmt has not been released, badges may be unavailable.

Checklist

[x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
[x] I have performed a self-review of my code
[x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
[x] My changes generate no new warnings
[x] I have run make lint and cargo build --release without getting any errors
[x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
[x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes

curryrasul commented 3 weeks ago

@wiasliaw

License: There are two different LICENSE in pmtree and need to confirm whether to use the MIT license or follow pmtree's license.

For this - It's common practice to include both Apache2.0 and MIT Licenses , that's why we made it. It's more flexible for users

wiasliaw commented 3 weeks ago

Hi, @curryrasul

For this - It's common practice to include both Apache2.0 and MIT Licenses , that's why we made it. It's more flexible for users.

My question is that pmtree includes both Apache2.0 and MIT Licenses and zk-kit-rust only includes MIT License. It is confusing which one to follow.

cedoor commented 3 weeks ago

My question is that pmtree includes both Apache2.0 and MIT Licenses and zk-kit-rust only includes MIT License. It is confusing which one to follow.

The license in the root folder is just about the monorepo. All packages should still have their own specific license as they're published as crates tho.

If that's confusing we could add some documentation in the main README file I think.

wiasliaw commented 2 weeks ago

I had added both mit and apahce licenses and fixed the readme.

If that's confusing we could add some documentation in the main README file I think.

It might confuse ppl that there's a license in the root but monorepos have their own license.

cedoor commented 2 weeks ago

@wiasliaw could you check if the code is well formatted? 1 workflow is not passing.

@sripwoud the error in the CI workflow is about code format right?

wiasliaw commented 2 weeks ago

@cedoor It looks like packages listed in Cargo.toml should be sorted.

cedoor commented 1 week ago

@cedoor It looks like packages listed in Cargo.toml should be sorted.

Oh yea! It should be ok now right? Ready to be merged?

wiasliaw commented 1 week ago

Yes.

cedoor commented 1 week ago

Hey@curryrasul, could you take a look again and approve it?