agusti
@bleu.eth
this is why you don't kill a spec less than a year after you birth it. Trust on building on FC has gone to 0 for many of us who simply don't have the time and bandwith to keep updating our little tools.] Frames are dead, long live frames. PS: The new stuff only has frames on name, its just mobile web apps just like telegram and worldcoin. don't treat us like fools please tysm
8 replies
4 recasts
25 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
Frames v1 still work — if they don’t please share an example where it is broken.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
agusti
@bleu.eth
they do, im just afraid they won't at some point so i wont be coding any new one from now on? I love frames v2 too, sorry if this wasn't clear, I just would have loved for the v1 spec to -live for ever- i understand why this is not feasible and its better for you guys to evolve this now (early) than later on, it just sux (from my personal POV/experience) but I can see how is the best for the protocl so i'll eat it and learn v2 😊
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
agusti
@bleu.eth
I don't know what problems @artlu was talking specifically, im just sad to think all frames v1 might -cease- to work some day, maybe im wrong! I hope!
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
artlu 🎩
@artlu
my pov: majority of frames v1 are small and cheap, they shouldn't cost the ecosystem very much to support liveness. 99% of the operational cost would be borne by the frame devs. Most frames require Hubs also (paid for indirectly by the devs + public goods). Already-written Warpcast code must be maintained as well, at a non-zero cost. IMO it would be a very cool thing to still be able to interact with an old cast-with-frame 10 years later. I 100% expect my smart contracts on ETH and Base to have that property; questionable with other L2s and L3s. My specific problem is different. Hopefully, it's a bug that @deodad identified as a possibility, and may be fixable.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction