-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 81
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
add v3 transactions and missing fields to receipts & block header #131
Conversation
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
Outdated
"description": "Version of the transaction scheme", | ||
"type": "string", | ||
"enum": [ | ||
"0x2" |
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.
Shouldn't it be 0x3? 👀
"execution_status": { | ||
"title": "Execution status", | ||
"$ref": "#/components/schemas/TXN_EXECUTION_STATUS" | ||
"execution_reources": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👀
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Typo, I think it should be "execution_resources"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 0 of 2 files reviewed, 21 unresolved discussions (waiting on @ArielElp and @DelevoXDG)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1370 at r1 (raw file):
}, "l1_gas_price": { "title": "L1 gas price",
You need to have to gas price fields (eth and strk)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1799 at r1 (raw file):
}, "DECLARE_TXN_V3": { "title": "Declare Transaction V2",
V3?
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1800 at r1 (raw file):
"DECLARE_TXN_V3": { "title": "Declare Transaction V2", "description": "Declare Contract Transaction V2",
V3?
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1814 at r1 (raw file):
}, "sender_address": { "title": "Sender address",
Don't you want to use the common fields in one place?
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1823 at r1 (raw file):
"$ref": "#/components/schemas/FELT" }, "max_fee": {
no max_fee
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1833 at r1 (raw file):
"type": "string", "enum": [ "0x2"
0x3
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1854 at r1 (raw file):
"$ref": "#/components/schemas/RESOURCE_LIMITS" }, "l2_gas": {
it's part of v3 but you shouldn't send it on v0.13.0, should we keep it here in the meantime?
Same for tip, da_mode and init_data
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1880 at r1 (raw file):
} }, "required": [
There is no max_fee
l2_gas, tip, paymaster_address,nonce and fee data_availability mode are not requires ATM
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1920 at r1 (raw file):
}, { "title": "Broadcasted invoke transaction V2",
Why v2?
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2058 at r1 (raw file):
{ "type": "object", "title": "Declare txn v2",
V3?
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2078 at r1 (raw file):
}, "max_fee": { "title": "Max fee",
Not exist in v3
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2106 at r1 (raw file):
}, "l2_gas": { "title": "L2 Gas",
it's part of v3 but you shouldn't send it on v0.13.0, should we keep it here in the meantime?
(Same for tip, volition fields, init code)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2131 at r1 (raw file):
} }, "required": [
See comment in invoke
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2235 at r1 (raw file):
}, "max_fee": { "title": "Max fee",
Doesn't exist in v3
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2276 at r1 (raw file):
}, "l2_gas": { "title": "L2 Gas",
it's part of v3 but you shouldn't send it on v0.13.0, should we keep it here in the meantime?
(Same for tip, volition fields, init code)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2301 at r1 (raw file):
} }, "required": [
See comment above
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2493 at r1 (raw file):
] }, "sender_address": {
Don't you want to create an object for common fields?
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2523 at r1 (raw file):
"$ref": "#/components/schemas/RESOURCE_LIMITS" }, "l2_gas": {
it's part of v3 but you shouldn't send it on v0.13.0, should we keep it here in the meantime?
(Same for tip, volition fields, init code)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 3579 at r1 (raw file):
"properties": { "max_amount": { "title": "max amount",
max_amount_per_unit?
Just reminding that |
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.
Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 21 unresolved discussions (waiting on @DelevoXDG and @EvyatarO)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1370 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
You need to have to gas price fields (eth and strk)
Added (still need to add the exact unit in the description; are we going with 10^-18?)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1799 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
V3?
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1800 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
V3?
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1823 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
no max_fee
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1833 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, DelevoXDG (Maksim Zdobnikau) wrote…
Shouldn't it be 0x3? 👀
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1833 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
0x3
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1854 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
it's part of v3 but you shouldn't send it on v0.13.0, should we keep it here in the meantime?
Same for tip, da_mode and init_data
Removed all. We should add them as required in the corresponding version.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1880 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
There is no max_fee
l2_gas, tip, paymaster_address,nonce and fee data_availability mode are not requires ATM
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1920 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
Why v2?
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2058 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
V3?
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2078 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
Not exist in v3
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2106 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
it's part of v3 but you shouldn't send it on v0.13.0, should we keep it here in the meantime?
(Same for tip, volition fields, init code)
Deleted until it's actually relevant
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2131 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
See comment in invoke
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2235 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
Doesn't exist in v3
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2276 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
it's part of v3 but you shouldn't send it on v0.13.0, should we keep it here in the meantime?
(Same for tip, volition fields, init code)
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2301 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
See comment above
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2523 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
it's part of v3 but you shouldn't send it on v0.13.0, should we keep it here in the meantime?
(Same for tip, volition fields, init code)
Done.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 3579 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
max_amount_per_unit?
What's max_amount_per_unit? ATM there's max_amount and max_price_per_unit
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.
Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 6 unresolved discussions (waiting on @ArielElp and @DelevoXDG)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1370 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, ArielElp wrote…
Added (still need to add the exact unit in the description; are we going with 10^-18?)
We are going w/ 10^-18, still no name yet.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 3579 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, ArielElp wrote…
What's max_amount_per_unit? ATM there's max_amount and max_price_per_unit
You are correct.
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.
Dismissed @EvyatarO from 4 discussions.
Reviewable status: 0 of 3 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @DelevoXDG and @EvyatarO)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 1814 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
Don't you want to use the common fields in one place?
These objects used to be less readable when non-flat, I rather keep it flat for now until we can completely remove old transaction types.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 2493 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, EvyatarO (Evyatar) wrote…
Don't you want to create an object for common fields?
These objects used to be less readable when non-flat, I rather keep it flat for now until we can completely remove old transaction types.
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 3043 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, DelevoXDG (Maksim Zdobnikau) wrote…
👀
?
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.
Reviewed 2 of 3 files at r3, 1 of 1 files at r4.
Dismissed @DelevoXDG from a discussion.
Reviewable status: 2 of 3 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @ArielElp)
api/starknet_api_openrpc.json
line 3043 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, DelevoXDG (Maksim Zdobnikau) wrote…
Typo, I think it should be "execution_resources"
Ah true, thanks!
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.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r5, 1 of 1 files at r6, all commit messages.
Reviewable status:complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @ArielElp)
This change is