Skip to content

Conversation

@chrisgitiota
Copy link
Contributor

@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota commented Nov 17, 2025

Description of change

The release of the Full Package History in product-core needs to be non breaking (or backward compatible) so that products using the already existing version of the PackageRegistry can use the new version without changes.

For this purpose this PR changes the following:

  • Switch toml dependency back to be static.
    To prevent existing projects from having build issues, the static toml depency needs to be maintained.
    As soon as all products have migrated to use the MoveHistoryManager and the legacy PackageRegistry functions
    (marked as deprecated now) have been removed, we can reactivate the toml dependency being controlled by
    the move-history-manager feature flag.
  • Make Package Registry downward compatible.
    The legacy versions of the functions insert_env and from_move_lock_content have been restored and the new
    version of insert_env has been renamed to insert_env_history to be distinguishable.

Products using legacy PackageRegistry functions that have been marked as deprecated now need to add the #[allow(deprecated)] macro everywhere where those deprecated functions and types are used in their code.

Links to any relevant issues

fixes iotaledger/notarization#71

How the change has been tested

This PR is tested using these Identity and Notarization PRs:

The Full Package History version of product core only needs the `toml` dependency if feature `move-history-manager` is activated.
To prevent existing projects from having build issues, we need to restore the static `toml` dependency, which needs to be turned into the feature flag controlled dependency again once the PackageRegistry legacy functions (marked as deprecated) are removed from product-core and all our products are using the `Move.history.toml` based PackageRegistry.
@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota self-assigned this Nov 17, 2025
@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota marked this pull request as draft November 17, 2025 14:25
@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota marked this pull request as ready for review November 17, 2025 16:25
@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota marked this pull request as draft November 17, 2025 16:25
@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota marked this pull request as ready for review November 17, 2025 17:05
@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota marked this pull request as draft November 17, 2025 17:05
@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota marked this pull request as ready for review November 17, 2025 17:08
@chrisgitiota chrisgitiota marked this pull request as draft November 17, 2025 17:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants