This is a cosmetic fix for bug found during testing 0.29.0-rc2.
pin add --name had shorthand -n
pin ls --name had no shorthand, and --names had -n
This unifies -n making it a shorthand for the same parameter in both
`pin ls` and `pin add`.
(cherry picked from commit a07852a3f0)
Updates: #9396Closes: #6831Closes: #6208
Currently the Graphsync server is not widely used due to lack of compatible software.
There have been many years yet we are unable to find any production software making use of the graphsync server in Kubo.
There exists some in the filecoin ecosystem but we are not aware of uses with Kubo.
Even in filecoin graphsync is not the only datatransfer solution available like it could have been in the past.
`go-graphsync` is also developped on many concurrent branches.
The specification for graphsync are less clear than the trustless gateway one and lack a complete conformance test suite any implementation can run.
It is not easily extansible either because selectors are too limited for interesting queries without sideloading ADLs, which for now are hardcoded solutions.
Finaly Kubo is consistently one of the fastest software to update to a new go-libp2p release.
This means the burden to track go-libp2p changes in go-graphsync falls on us, else Kubo cannot compile even if almost all users do not use this feature.
We are then removing the graphsync server experiment.
For people who want alternatives we would like you to try the Trustless-Gateway-over-Libp2p experiment instead, the protocol is simpler (request-response-based) and let us reuse both clients and servers with minimal injection in the network layer.
If you think this is a mistake and we should put it back you should try to answer theses points:
- Find a piece of opensource code which uses a graphsync client to download data from Kubo.
- Why is Trustless-Gateway-over-Libp2p not suitable instead ?
- Why is bitswap not suitable instead ?
Implementation details such as go-graphsync performance vs boxo/gateway is not very interesting to us in this discussion unless they are really huge (in the range of 10x~100x+ more) because the gateway code is under high development and we would be interested in fixing theses.
Fixes#8492
This introduces "nopfs" as a preloaded plugin into Kubo
with support for denylists from https://github.com/ipfs/specs/pull/383
It automatically makes Kubo watch *.deny files found in:
- /etc/ipfs/denylists
- $XDG_CONFIG_HOME/ipfs/denylists
- $IPFS_PATH/denylists
* test: Gateway.NoFetch and GatewayOverLibp2p
adds missing tests for "no fetch" gateways one can expose,
in both cases the offline mode is done by passing custom
blockservice/exchange into path resolver, which means
global path resolver that has nopfs intercept is not used,
and the content blocking does not happen on these gateways.
* fix: use offline path resolvers where appropriate
this fixes the problem described in
https://github.com/ipfs/kubo/pull/10161#issuecomment-1782175955
by adding explicit offline path resolvers that are backed
by offline exchange, and using them in NoFetch gateways
instead of the default online ones
---------
Co-authored-by: Henrique Dias <hacdias@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Marcin Rataj <lidel@lidel.org>
