feat: identity class #815
feat: identity class #815
Conversation
rflechtner
force-pushed
the
rf-identity-class
branch
2 times, most recently
from
3dc8af4 to
3e46424
Compare
rflechtner
force-pushed
the
rf-sdk-surface
branch
from
e2245cf to
f382943
Compare
rflechtner
force-pushed
the
rf-identity-class
branch
2 times, most recently
from
3127f68 to
02e6419
Compare
| * @param keypairs | ||
| * @returns The (in-place) modified Identity object for chaining. | ||
| */ | ||
| addKeypair: (...keypairs: Array<Keypair | KeyringPair>) => Promise<Identity> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this name may be problematic; if I implement a method that helps rotate or add public keys to the DID document, these namings may clash
| resolver?: typeof resolve | ||
| transactionStrategy: TransactionStrategy<T> | ||
| }): Promise<T> | ||
| export async function makeIdentity<T extends IdentityClass>({ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
there's makeIdentity and newIdentity; names could be improved to distinguish them better.
| T extends IdentityClass & | ||
| Required<Pick<Identity, 'submitTx' | 'submitterAddress'>> | ||
| >(args: { | ||
| keys: TypedKeyPair | TypedKeyPairs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this parameter could accept signers too; but the name would have to change. I don't like it anyway though - it's too similar but different from the keypairs parameter of makeIdentity
tests/bundle/bundle-test.ts
Outdated
| signers: [...(await aliceSign(alice)), payerSigner], | ||
| submitterAccount: payerSigner.id, | ||
| }) | ||
| const issued = await Issuer.issue(credential, alice as any) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I’m used to seeing this test as an example of real-life usage of the SDK. As an SDK user I won’t be happy to write as any in my code. Is this an indication of an issue? (pun intended)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah, probably a leftover, I don't think it's necessary
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But more generally, what do you think about the overall approach to interacting with identity primitives here? Is this something you would have liked to implement sporran and SKYC on?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think my judgement is currently clouded by the pain of seeing the bundle-test in its current state. I believe it should be talked over.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, would love to chat, because right now I wouldn't really know what to change here
rflechtner
force-pushed
the
rf-identity-class
branch
from
ca0760b to
1e578db
Compare
rflechtner
force-pushed
the
rf-identity-class
branch
from
3621338 to
4643d4a
Compare
| { secretKey: encPublicKey, publicKey: encPublicKey, type: 'x25519' }, | ||
| ], | ||
| }, | ||
| }) | ||
| const address = api.createType('Address', authPublicKey).toString() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How does this work? I tried using this but failed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The api throws an error back that it has a secret key.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I pass only the publickey I get my address.
|
@rflechtner Can we close this? |
|
I do believe this is superseded by #881, so I'll close this PR. Please do not delete the branch though, as we may want to cherry-pick some features - especially the |
closes kiltprotocol/ticket#3043
TODOs
authorizeTx,submitTx, andupdate.