-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 128
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[ANCHOR-704] Clean up amount_fee
and add user_action_required_by
#935
Conversation
This will go to 3.0 release as 2.9 has already been frozen. Version doc release is controversial to code release, no major change should be stack after release has been cut |
Preview is available here: |
@@ -1064,8 +1090,8 @@ components: | |||
$ref: '#/components/schemas/Amount' | |||
amount_out: | |||
$ref: '#/components/schemas/Amount' | |||
amount_fee: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we remove this field? I know it's deprecated in 2.9 and we removed deprecated fields from the docs in the past but now that we have versioned docs, I think we should keep it. WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We always remove deprecated fields from docs. This amount_fee
is totally removed from platform transaction in 3.0.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should not remove deprecated fields now that we have versioning but I'm okay with merging as is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I meant to wait till after the 2.9 release to merge it. In this way it will goes to 3.0
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
BTW, I think next
should always be 3.0
We can copy existing docs for 2.9 to make docs for 2.10 (if necessary)
Co-authored-by: Philip Liu <[email protected]>
Preview is available here: |
@@ -1064,8 +1090,8 @@ components: | |||
$ref: '#/components/schemas/Amount' | |||
amount_out: | |||
$ref: '#/components/schemas/Amount' | |||
amount_fee: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
BTW, I think next
should always be 3.0
We can copy existing docs for 2.9 to make docs for 2.10 (if necessary)
@@ -109,6 +113,8 @@ SECRET_SEP24_MORE_INFO_URL_JWT_SECRET="your encryption key shared with your busi | |||
|
|||
`SECRET_SEP24_INTERACTIVE_URL_JWT_SECRET` and `SECRET_SEP24_MORE_INFO_URL_JWT_SECRET` are encryption keys that the Anchor Platform will use to generate short-lived tokens it will add to the URLs provided to the wallet. Your business server must also have these keys in its environment so it can verify the token's signature. | |||
|
|||
`SEP24_INITIAL_USER_DEADLINE_SECONDS` is an optional param that defines the time in seconds a user has to act before the transaction moves to the next status. It determines the `user_action_required_by` field, which indicates the deadline. Check [JSON-RPC Methods][json-rpc-methods] for usage examples. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you mind adding a paragraph of how it's supposed to be used?
(i.e. business should call get /transaction and check with user_action_required_by has passed, and manually execute the logic. For example, they can expire the transaction, or auto-refund, depending on the tx status)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do want to keep this part focused on all the configuration and do not stretch too much.
The use of user_action_required_by
should go to where's really being applied, e.g RPC method section, or platform transaction
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm that's fair. Maybe we should include it in SEP-24/SEP-6 guide instead? This section makes sense to include this information in.
Preview is available here: |
Preview is available here: |
Co-authored-by: Gleb <[email protected]>
Preview is available here: |
Preview is available here: |
…935) * amount_fee and user_action_required_by * Update platforms/anchor-platform/admin-guide/sep6/configuration.mdx Co-authored-by: Philip Liu <[email protected]> * add user_action_required_by to GET /transactions query param * add instruction in sep6 and sep24 * Update platforms/anchor-platform/admin-guide/sep24/integration.mdx Co-authored-by: Gleb <[email protected]> * prettier --------- Co-authored-by: Philip Liu <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Gleb <[email protected]>
As title