refactor: introduce use_did and use_did_method #2862
Conversation
|
Quick update, I took a stab at wrangling the logic of the |
|
I think this test failure is unrelated so I'll focus on fixing unit tests first and removing the emit flags officially. |
|
Yes — we are getting this error too often. Pretty sure it is that the DID Seed is not random enough — we keep reusing DIDs used in earlier tests... |
|
Quick note that with the removal of the |
dbluhm
force-pushed
the
refactor/use-did
branch
3 times, most recently
from
768966e
to
6c2d2b2
Compare
|
Interop testing is looking pretty good. I have some small issues to sort out with backwards compat still (my respond-in-kind for the message version is a little wonky) but should be wrapping up soon. |
To didexchange admin api routes that trigger an outbound didexchange request Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
But add emit args to demo/int test args Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Corrected serialization, service decorator should be base58 raw keys Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
As outlined in hyperledger#2857 Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
|
This is ready for review! |
|
Good point! I'll see if I can toss in a quick doc update somewhere |
|
As I was writing the docs, I realized there is one case I overlooked: when the inviter creates an invite with didexchage/1.1 only and the invitee supports 1.1, it is still sending an unqualified DID in a 1.1 message if the invitee accepts the invitation without specifying a |
- on 1.1, default to use_did_method=did:peer:4 when not specified - on use_did, fix bugs with setting the did - doc updates Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm <[email protected]>
|
|
@dbluhm — are you happy that this is ready to merge? If so — we can push 0.12.0-rc3 out. |
|
Yep, ready! I was half keeping an eye on the integration tests just to be sure but my testing indicates that it should be fine |
This implements #2857. With one modification: rather than having a single parameter
use_did, I found that the processing became significantly simpler by having ause_didanduse_did_methodparameter. Hopefully that's an acceptable trade off.WIP: Currently, just the updates to the did exchange routes have been made. Working through the OOB route updates now. Wanted to open early for feedback.