###### tags: `Cosmos SDK`

# SDK Architecture Review - 2021-08-27

The **SDK Architecture Review** meeting is a bi-weekly meeting focused on architecture discussions of ADRs and features currently in development (any issues tagged with the label "Status: Needs Architecture Review").

## Agenda

- [x] Working Group Check In (groups in DESIGN phase)
- https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/issues/9058
- [x] Event History / Event Hooks
- https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/pull/9305
- https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/discussions/9656
- [x] Expedited Governance Proposal
- https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/issues/10014
- [x] ADR for Check/Deliver Tx Middleware
- https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/issues/9953
- [x] x/bank.Send + IBC
- https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/discussions/9948
- [ ] Decompose BaseApp into Middleware
- https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/discussions/9934

## Notes

Live transcript: https://otter.ai/u/0ILpLdaaT_OUjhnf7Nry1yY8cE8

### Working Group Check In

**working group**

- Protobuf v2 Codegen
- No Updates
- Tx Improvements
- f
- SMT
- We continuing work on deprecating multistore and are thinking about
-
- Staking Improvements
- Marko: As far as epoch staking we've got a new repo with staking, slashing & distribution. The idea is that this is how htey'd need to be grouped together
- Debugging one simulation test in Epoch Staking
- Decimal Updates
- No updates

### Event History / Event Hooks

- Michael: The idea of typed events was quite critical from a usability angle
- Let's wait for Aaron to go into this in more detail

### Expedited Governance Proposal

- Dev: Is the key thing that you have a 2-day option, or that there's a fixed threshold?
- Ira: The security group would prefer to coordinate, vote, pass instantly
- The theory is that it would update the end-vote time as soon as the threshold is met, which would advance the process
- Jim: As a general question, having something work faster is a good thing. Are there security pitfalls in having voting work faster?
- Robert: Could this threshold be a module parameter managed by gov?
- Ira: I was envisioning it as that, yes

### ADR for Check/DeliverTx Middleware

- Robert: The whole idea is to refactor antehandlers to behave more as middleware
- A few weeks ago Amaury worked on a proof of concept for it, and now we've made an ADR based on that work
- One open question in the design: The response types. Each ABCI interface method has a different reponse type and we were thinking of using a different spec & a singular response type.
- Dev: It seems like we should coordinate this work more closely with the ABCI++ work.
- Marko: Also, in 0.35, CheckTx does have some added fields (3 additional fields).
- Marko: Can you add an issue in the tendermint/spec repo on this topic?

### x/bank.Send to implement IBC
- Robert: Would be good to have more thumbs up & buy-in to this idea
- Sunny: So far we've only done this in the msg_server of the bank.send package
- Next steps: Sunny to sync w/ Osmo team to see if someone has capacity to write an ADR

### Decompose Baseapp into Middleware

- Robert: Kind of related to the check/delivertx middelware work

## Follow Up

- [ ] ...