Repository navigation
[uss_qualifier] Remove participant verifiable capabilities - #1824
Open
BenjaminPelletier wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
BenjaminPelletier wants to merge 1 commit into
BenjaminPelletier wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
BenjaminPelletier
added
P3
BenjaminPelletier
marked this pull request as ready for review
October 18, 2026 22:27
This branch has not been deployed
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR resolves #1823, but is effectively a concrete proposal rather than a foregone conclusion. If the claims in #1823 are not accurate, then we wouldn't want to merge this PR. But, I think it will be a good idea to cut unused code like this when possible. And, I think the cost of a mistake is relatively low as I believe AI tools should be able to resurrect the content in this PR fairly easily in the future even when there would be git conflicts.
@barroco, I'd appreciate TSC-level review. Anyone else interested in these features is of course also welcome to review.
This PR pays off tech debt and isn't urgent.