Skip to content
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

Expose the wallet APIs #543

Closed
moxiegirl opened this issue Sep 12, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Expose the wallet APIs #543

moxiegirl opened this issue Sep 12, 2018 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@moxiegirl
Copy link

moxiegirl commented Sep 12, 2018

Spoke with @kantai these are documented but not exposed. For example, https://github.com/blockstack/blockstack.js/blob/master/src/operations/txbuild.js#L1100

We will need to add these back in. Aaron also said, some of the old wallet functions like “get my spend address” are just done in JavaScript by a given client, and don’t have explicit APIs in blockstack.js so maybe @larrysalibra you can speak to that a bit more.

These are the categories of the APIs that the core spec said should be in javascript:

Blockstack clients should use blockstack.js

  • for querying client-side configuration state.
  • client-side configuration management.
  • query the status of pending transactions.
  • wallet management
  • query balances.
  • manage keys and query UTXOs.
  • generate transactions, and send transactions.
  • to encrypt keys
  • manage keys in a client wallet.
  • register and manage names.
  • generating transactions.
  • broadcast transactions.
@larrysalibra
Copy link
Contributor

This interface is marked as private because there is no way for a blockstack app to use it since the authentication flow doesn’t support providing access to user wallets.

We rcan emove the private notation but I think this will confuse app developers who will think that they can do blockstack transactions in their apps only to find that this isn’t really possible in the way that this API implies.

If we’re going to make the API public we should make it more consistent in line with the discussion in the pull request that added this functionality #433

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jan 27, 2021

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Jan 27, 2021
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Feb 3, 2021

This issue has been automatically closed. Please reopen if needed.

@stale stale bot closed this as completed Feb 3, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants