Farcaster Devs

why does revoking a signer delete all messages it created? or is this just a warpcast added step?

perhaps @horsefacts.eth @stephancill

cypherpunk wannabe, engineer working on @frames /open-frames /opencast
https://stephancill.co.za create stories at https://stories.steer.fun

I'm eth newbie..just learning
(working on @farcaster)

terminally.online

Existing hub designs are eventually consistent without global ordering

So there’s no way to determine which messages came before or after a signer was revoked

There’s a major pending FIP that introduces total ordering via a “snap chain” 

If / when this lands we’ll be able to remove this limitation

/bettik founder /outercorps stalwart | ex-binance, ex-celsiusX

Existing hub designs are eventually consistent without global ordering

So there’s no way to determine which messages came before or after a signer was revoked

There’s a major pending FIP that introduces total ordering via a “snap chain” 

If / when this lands we’ll be able to remove this limitation

https://github.com/farcasterxyz/protocol/discussions/193

Building @warpcast and @farcaster, new dad, like making food

i'm glad that ordering will be improved, but won't that make the problem of messages removed due to a revoked signer even harder to solve because a new signer can't re-issue them?

ah, freezing with snap chain sounds like a great plan

a signer can always re-sign a message

what it unlocks is not needing to remove any messages in the first place when a signer is revoked

instead we can freeze existing messages and say no more message can be added by it