Revisit transfer()'s inputs about bigchaindb-driver HOT 11 CLOSED

Alternatively, @TimDaub and I had a discussion where it might make more sense if bigchaindb_driver exposed bigchaindb_common's Transaction model to the end user. That way, driver.transactions.retrieve can also return a Transaction model (that should be much, much easier to work with than plain JSON).

from bigchaindb-driver.

It may also be useful to expose a TransactionBuilder from the driver if this gets implemented.

from bigchaindb-driver.

For now, I propose we focus on what could be called a low-level driver, in which dictionaries are used for the data structure for response and request payloads. This will keep things simpler, and uniform for all endpoints.

from bigchaindb-driver.

I'm not a big fan if that means we'll eventually write another package that's a high-level driver. I'd be ok with this if we exposed a convenient interface on the main BigchainDB object while the low-level stuff lives in BigchainDB.raw or similar.

Making (and using) cryptocondition dicts by hand is just way too hard for someone new or just wants basic functionality.

from bigchaindb-driver.

All this involves is that the end-user of the driver passes and receives dictionaries, instead of a Transaction model instances. The Transaction model is still used under the hood to perform the required operations, such as creating a TRANSFER transaction, getting the inputs, and signing the transaction.

from bigchaindb-driver.

All this involves is that the end-user of the driver passes and receives dictionaries, instead of a Transaction model instances.

Not sure how suitable this is. Creating a transfer is not as easy as giving a transfer method a couple of input transactions.

See here:

• https://github.com/bigchaindb/bigchaindb-common/blob/master/bigchaindb_common/transaction.py#L407
• https://github.com/bigchaindb/bigchaindb-common/blob/master/bigchaindb_common/transaction.py#L360
• https://github.com/bigchaindb/bigchaindb-common/blob/master/bigchaindb_common/transaction.py#L147

from bigchaindb-driver.

@TimDaub both .to_inputs() and .transfer() are currently used "under the hood" and will still be used.

I will make a PR and we can discuss if needed around the PR itself, it will be more productive this way and will help prevent misunderstandings.

from bigchaindb-driver.

@sohkai and @TimDaub can we close this issue since .transfer is being deprecated, and given the changes introduced by #109?

As for the question of the design choices, and whether the driver should deal with dictionaries or expose models, I propose to discuss these matters in a separate issue.

If you can be a bit patient, and wait for the design document that should come out of #156, the discussion may be more productive and grounded then.

from bigchaindb-driver.

👍

from bigchaindb-driver.

status

• @TimDaub has provided his fulfillment
• waiting for @sohkai's fulfillment

😏

from bigchaindb-driver.

👍

from bigchaindb-driver.