-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
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
Implement --generate-only option for commands that create transactions #966
Comments
@sunnya97 and I had a conversation about this today. We could follow the I think the ideal way to deal with this would be to leave the existing functionality, and implement new commands for this workflow. I think the list of affected commands would be:
One way to implement this could be to leave the above commands and then create 3 new subcommands:
The Another possible way to implement this would be to implement a Would love to hear some thoughts on this as it's still tagged |
Alternatively, maybe a bit more easy to implement - we could add some common flags: |
@rigelrozanski The |
I don't believe |
Cool. I think we go with this then. |
Care should be taken in implementation such that the commands can be
Or the result could be saved to a file, edited and then read from a file:
|
I'm also going to open issues for both |
awesome |
Sketching description and acceptance criteria:
|
I would say
|
Agreed. [EDIT] The Given clause should be used to lay the context/set of inputs out. In that case, the inputs consist of transaction parameters. |
I'm on this, a brief preview of the output follows:
|
@alessio Looks great! Think this will be a nice feature. Can we switch the variable names to lower case and |
Will do
…On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, 20:29 Jack Zampolin, ***@***.***> wrote:
@alessio <https://github.com/alessio> Looks great! Think this will be a
nice feature. Can we switch the variable names to lower case and -
separated (chain-id, account-number)?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#966 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAN_7AAsLi6w7NvFGPJsrSJgBgmPuZNzks5uUFQngaJpZM4T13ch>
.
|
@alessio it would be great if you could open up a WIP PR for your work on this issue? (3.v. in https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md#contributing) |
The new CLI flag builds an unsigned transaction and writes it to STDOUT. Likewise, REST clients can now append generate_only=true to a request's query arguments list and expect a JSON response carrying the unsigned transaction. Closes: #966
Does anyone know if this ever happened? Based on the output of |
@hukkinj1 Afaik, we do not support singing txs with a private key held ephemerally at the moment. |
The
gaiacli
should support workflow for offline signing of transactions.Additionally, it should support signing without saving a private key to disk (ie. tendermint/go-crypto#57)!
This flow should also allow an HD path to be specified so you can pick an account by passing the seed phrase and the HD path (at least for secp256k1 keys).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: