feat: add tx set
#1760
feat: add tx set
#1760
Conversation
Currently allows updating fields on Transactions V1 only.
| /// Send a transaction envelope to the network | ||
| Send(send::Cmd), | ||
| /// Set various options for a transaction | ||
| Set(set::Cmd), | ||
| /// Simulate a transaction envelope from stdin | ||
| Simulate(simulate::Cmd), | ||
| /// Sign a transaction envelope appending the signature to the envelope | ||
| Sign(sign::Cmd), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we organise these commands by order of likely to use next? i.e.:
- New
- Set
- Simulate
- Sign
- Send
| XdrStdin(#[from] super::xdr::Error), | ||
| #[error(transparent)] | ||
| Xdr(#[from] xdr::Error), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why are there two distinct xdr error types in use here? There should only ever be one in the cli in use.
FULL_HELP_DOCS.md
Outdated
| ## `stellar tx set` | ||
|
|
||
| Set various options for a transaction | ||
|
|
||
| **Usage:** `stellar tx set [OPTIONS]` | ||
|
|
||
| ###### **Options:** | ||
|
|
||
| * `--sequence-number <SEQUENCE_NUMBER>` — Set the transactions sequence number | ||
| * `--fee <FEE>` — Set the transactions fee | ||
| * `--memo-text <MEMO_TEXT>` — Set the transactions memo text | ||
| * `--memo-id <MEMO_ID>` — Set the transactions memo id | ||
| * `--memo-hash <MEMO_HASH>` — Set the transactions memo hash | ||
| * `--memo-return <MEMO_RETURN>` — Set the transactions memo return | ||
| * `--source-account <SOURCE_ACCOUNT>` — Change the source account for the transaction | ||
| * `--max-time-bound <MAX_TIME_BOUND>` — Set the transactions max time bound | ||
| * `--min-time-bound <MIN_TIME_BOUND>` — Set the transactions min time bound | ||
| * `--min-ledger <MIN_LEDGER>` — Set the minimum ledger that the transaction is valid | ||
| * `--max-ledger <MAX_LEDGER>` — Set the max ledger that the transaction is valid. 0 or not present means to max | ||
| * `--min-seq-num <MIN_SEQ_NUM>` — set mimimum sequence number | ||
| * `--min-seq-age <MIN_SEQ_AGE>` | ||
| * `--min-seq-ledger-gap <MIN_SEQ_LEDGER_GAP>` — min sequeence ledger gap | ||
| * `--extra-signers <EXTRA_SIGNERS>` — Extra signers | ||
| * `--no-preconditions` — Set precondition to None |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Playing around with this interface I think some design discussion is required for this sub-command.
When we previously discussed this (#1643 (comment)) I had suggested we could have one sub-command per field to set, but I think this arrangement is also reasonable, but looks like there's missing functionality as it is, so we need that design to flesh out all the use cases.
For example, it looks like we can clear all the preconditions with 'no-preconditions', but it's not obvious to a user which fields are being cleared because the options are bundled in a single command the relationship between all the options appear equal / related, when they are not.
Another example, there's no way to remove a memo, or some precondition fields without clearing all preconditions.
I've started a design discussion on the issue:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@leighmcculloch I've pushed up some changes that I think align with the updated design discussion from #1643 - is this in line with what you had in mind? I have some ideas for refactoring things to DRY them up, but wanted to get some feedback on the UI before I cleaned up.
|
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. It will be closed in 30 days unless the stale label is removed. |
|
This pull request is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. It will be closed in 90 days unless the stale label is removed. |
elizabethengelman
force-pushed
the
feat/tx_set
branch
from
376b50a to
57a3e11
Compare
elizabethengelman
force-pushed
the
feat/tx_set
branch
from
e76e014 to
93bcd8f
Compare
| @@ -1517,6 +1517,8 @@ Sign, Simulate, and Send transactions | |||
|
|
|||
| * `hash` — Calculate the hash of a transaction envelope | |||
| * `new` — Create a new transaction | |||
| * `edit` — | |||
| * `set` — Set various options for a transaction | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
planning to remove this command once the transition to being nested under edit is complete
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm currently using tx edit to do interactive editing on #1893, but we can discuss how we can make both of our ideas work together (I'll add this as discussion topic for today).
It'd be nice if prs were scoped by the actual feature you're working on, in this case tx set. Can you please keep a separate branch with your tx edit version in draft mode, and only put the tx set changes up for review?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm currently using tx edit to do interactive editing on #1893, but we can discuss how we can make both of our ideas work together (I'll add this as discussion topic for today).
Sounds great!
It'd be nice if prs were scoped by the actual feature you're working on, in this case tx set. Can you please keep a separate branch with your tx edit version in draft mode, and only put the tx set changes up for review?
I agree—based on the discussion in #1643, it sounded like there was interest in moving tx set under tx edit rather than keeping it as a separate command. With that in mind, I was viewing this PR as implementing tx edit set.
This PR should definitely still be in draft—nice catch! Would it make sense to close this one and start a new PR for clarity? Happy to discuss further in the meeting later as well!
elizabethengelman
force-pushed
the
feat/tx_set
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d3a8578 to
f5ef919
Compare
elizabethengelman
force-pushed
the
feat/tx_set
branch
from
f5ef919 to
5ce14d3
Compare
Currently allows updating fields on Transactions V1 only.
Close #1643