Frontend configurable gateway endpoint #704
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 1 Ignored Deployment
|
|
We currently do not have IPFS gateway behind https so http is fine for now. |
alabdao
suggested changes
Oct 17, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@acashmoney can we call it ipfs_gateway instead of just gateway. Might cause confusion.
alabdao
suggested changes
Oct 17, 2023
alabdao
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@alabdao would you mind reviewing to check if the staging and prod deployments have the configurable gateways passing in through the builds?
I also wanted to get your perspective on the endpoints themselves. Should we be using http or https?