View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0007598 | Taler | wallet-core | public | 2023-01-18 18:34 | 2024-07-28 21:55 |
| Reporter | Florian Dold | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | normal | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | have not tried |
| Status | acknowledged | Resolution | open | ||
| Target Version | post-1.0 | ||||
| Summary | 0007598: review and revise backup APIs | ||||
| Description | Points to discuss: * It's unclear whether the "provisional" state of providers makes sense. Instead of a provisional "addBackupProvider", should we have some "checkBackupProvider" that just returns the fees and is state-less regarding the wallet DB? * It's not clear whether the semantics current return type of addBackupProvider makes sense. The operation should either be successful or not, but it currently returns whether the provider requires a payment. It also internally tries to start a first backup cycle, which I'm not sure makes sense, especially since it is waiting for the backup cycle to complete *before* addBackupProvider even returns a response | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-18 18:34 | Florian Dold | New Issue | |
| 2023-01-18 18:34 | Florian Dold | Status | new => assigned |
| 2023-01-18 18:34 | Florian Dold | Assigned To | => Florian Dold |
| 2023-01-18 18:39 | Florian Dold | Summary | review and revise sync APIs => review and revise backup APIs |
| 2023-02-17 02:43 | Florian Dold | Target Version | => 0.9.3 |
| 2023-02-19 18:23 | Florian Dold | Target Version | 0.9.3 => 0.10 |
| 2023-04-04 19:23 | Florian Dold | Target Version | 0.10 => post-1.0 |
| 2023-04-13 20:36 | Florian Dold | Category | wallet (TS core) => wallet-core |
| 2023-08-24 16:25 | Florian Dold | Assigned To | Florian Dold => |
| 2023-08-24 16:25 | Florian Dold | Status | assigned => acknowledged |
| 2024-07-28 21:55 | Christian Grothoff | Severity | minor => feature |
