You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We went from `0.1.8` to `0.1.15` in a single working session. Each one was a correct release-please cut, but the cadence reads as "still moving fast" to external consumers, and there is no public statement of which surfaces are stable vs. likely to break in the next minor.
Before any zig-libp2p announcement to the broader Zig / libp2p audience we need a 1.0-RC that:
Freezes the `root.zig` public re-exports as the stable surface.
Locks the QUIC + libp2p TLS wire (covered by tests + the cross-impl matrix, but make the commitment explicit).
Actual ecosystem-feature parity with go-libp2p (DHT, relay, NAT). 1.0 here means "the lean-consensus / Eth2 subset is stable", not "feature parity with the largest libp2p in the ecosystem".
Acceptance
`docs/STABILITY.md` merged.
`v1.0.0-rc.1` published via release-please.
README announces the freeze; CHANGELOG documents the semver rule.
Problem
We went from `0.1.8` to `0.1.15` in a single working session. Each one was a correct release-please cut, but the cadence reads as "still moving fast" to external consumers, and there is no public statement of which surfaces are stable vs. likely to break in the next minor.
Before any zig-libp2p announcement to the broader Zig / libp2p audience we need a 1.0-RC that:
Scope
Out of scope
Actual ecosystem-feature parity with go-libp2p (DHT, relay, NAT). 1.0 here means "the lean-consensus / Eth2 subset is stable", not "feature parity with the largest libp2p in the ecosystem".
Acceptance