docs: add documentation on how to build rollups on Celestia with blobstream #1489
Conversation
WalkthroughThe update introduces guidance on creating Blobstream rollups for data availability on EVM chains. It covers share commitments, spans, and proof generation for optimistic and zk-rollups, emphasizing the use of Celestia for data referencing and ensuring data integrity and security in rollup design. Changes
Recent Review DetailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI Files selected for processing (1)
Files not reviewed due to errors (1)
Additional Context UsedLanguageTool (145)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
I'll review and add to menu when the time comes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
really good first draft! I think this could be super helpful to devs in actually understanding how this works, and could be the thing that we point rollup devs to in the future
imo, I do think we can clarify a bit of the content, and reorganize it a bit. again, imo, a potential structure could be
- very quick intro into blobstream
- explain each mechanism to prove inclusion as precisely, concisely, and isolated as we can
- then briefly mention that zk and oru s differ in how they use blobstream. the optimistic vs pessimistic nature
- how an ORU would use each described mechanism for proving inclusion. if you don't think it makes sense to use this construction explain why! this would be super informative
- how a zkr would use this, what challenges does the pessimistic approach run into?
one general thing about this post is that it assumes that the reader is reading the entire things from start to finish, but I don't think this usally occurs with technical docs. If we can, I think it would add a bit of clarity if we can order things a bit differently
jcstein
changed the title
|
@evan-forbes Thanks a lot for the feedback. I rewrote the whole document to be almost self-contained. Please review when you have time |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have a some comments, but think they can be addressed later and that we shouldn't block on this any longer
great work @rach-id and thanks for pushing this through
* feat: drafting buttons * fix: color of btn * feat: add note text optional * feat: rename to build-whatever.md * fix: copy * feat: category shuffle * fix: suggestions from code review * feat: add vistara * Apply suggestions from code review * fix: typo * feat: add alt texts * fix: typo * feat: aria-labels * docs: shuffle intro
* Update mocha_versions.js * Update mocha_versions.js
* Add Grove to nodes/mainnet.md * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * Update nodes/mainnet.md Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * Store image in src code * Add description of archival nodes * Apply suggestions from code review * Apply suggestions from code review * Update nodes/mainnet.md --------- Co-authored-by: joshcs.eth <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix typo * fix typo * fix typo * fix typo * fix typos * fix typo * fix typo * fix typos * fix typos * fix typos * fix typos * fix typo * fix typo * fix typo Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * Apply suggestions from code review --------- Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: joshcs.eth <[email protected]>
Add noders endpoints
* Update mocha-testnet.md Add noders endpoints * Fixed link to endpoint * Apply suggestions from code review --------- Co-authored-by: joshcs.eth <[email protected]>
|
pardon my rebase |
|
@jcstein why did we add the headings? I thought that if we have the heading in |
|
@rach-id to avoid breaking linting rules. i think that they would resolve as "#pros", "#pros-1" etc. but are more clear with specific headings to the section they're relevant to however, if you'd prefer, i can revert the changes and ignore the linting rules |
|
@jcstein fixed the headings, should be good to go |
|
@jcstein I am checking the deployed PR https://celestiaorg.github.io/docs-preview/pr-1489/ and I don't see this document anywhere. Should I add something so it's part of the blobstream section? |
|
gm @rach-id it is under "Developers > Build whatever (formerly rollup category)" |
|
|
||
| ## Concepts | ||
|
|
||
| ### Share commitment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two issues here:
- It's not clear why "share commitment" is used here instead of "blob commitment" as used everywhere else.
- For the reader reading from top to bottom, it's not obvious until the next subsection that this is only one way of doing things, rather than the only way.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
-
I saw it in the specs being called
blob share commitmentthat's why I usedshare commitment. Will change ASAP. -
good catch, will mention that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@adlerjohn check here: #1541
Overview
Given the number of people asking how to build a rollup on Celestia that uses Blobstream, this document aims to fill that lack.
Checklist
Summary by CodeRabbit