How stable should I consider the Safe Launcher API in light of the recent announcement about renaming the Launcher to the Authenticator? I’m working on a typescript client for the launcher, and it would be nice to know if it is worth polishing it enough to publish or if I should just keep it internal.
1 Like
It sounds like things are about to get a huge overhaul. I’ve asked the same question on the main forums and haven’t had an answer yet, but it looks like us App devs might need to wait for these changes before trying to make polished finished SAFE Apps… 
If you are mainly using SAFE NFS and SAFE DNS I think you will be fine. Changes here are much less likely, and easy to update even if they happen.
If you are using the low level API it might be worth waiting, depending on how much effort is involved in that part of your development.
1 Like
@happybeing, that’s good to know. I think we may need to use the low level API, but we will try to keep our usage to a minimum until more information comes out.
1 Like
in the browser.
We intend to keep a backwards-compatible layer (or at least an easy migration-path) for the low-level access in the browser, too.
So, basically if you are using safe-js from the browse, things should be easy, as we intend to support that API and keep the breaking changes as small as possible. If you use the REST-API (directly), then you will have to rewrite things, because we are going to scratch that (though we might provide a URL-injection that acts like it from the browser - but don’t quote me on that!).
2 Likes
Great, thanks for clearing it up.
Another reason why web apps are always superior 
1 Like
I’m not familiar with safe-js, where can I learn more about it?
1 Like
1 Like