View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0004877 | Taler | other | public | 2017-02-01 14:18 | 2017-06-06 12:18 |
| Reporter | Florian Dold | Assigned To | Marcello Stanisci | Resolution deadline | |
| Implementer | Reviewer | ||||
| Release signed by | Deployed by | ||||
| Verifier | Communicator | ||||
| Data protection authority notification required | No | ||||
| CSIRT notification required | No | ||||
| Estimated effort (hours) | Actual effort (hours) | 0 | |||
| Fast-track | No | ||||
| Work package | none | ||||
| Priority | high | Severity | text | Reproducibility | have not tried |
| Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | git (master) | ||||
| Target Version | 0.3 | Fixed in Version | 0.3 | ||
| Summary | 0004877: migrate to new contract-related terminology | ||||
| Description | In the new terminology, the frontend creates an "order", the HTTP PUTs it to the backends /propopsal endpoint, which returns the proposal corresponding to the order (with the merchant signature and missing fields in the order filled out. With a HTTP GET on /proposal, the frontend can query proposals by transaction ID or proposal hash. The wallet stores as a "contract" the proposal together with signed coins. Also, "transaction_id" becomes "order_id", since it's used by the frontend to uniquely identify an order. The transaction_id name might be reused in the future for negotiating instances of payments for the *same* proposal between the exchange and merchant. It's not part of the contract anymore. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| related to | 0004873 | closed | Florian Dold | Update contract fields |
| I thought this was already implemented. What's the status? (I fixed some related API docs today, sent you an e-mail about it). | |
| Yes and no. The source code is ported, but _comments_ don't match ported code yet, at least in the merchant backend. And as of API/docs, I'm pretty sure they're still mainly obsolete. What to do with this issue? | |
| addressing remaining leftovers in merchant's and api's codebases. There might be other parts in the whole Taler code having obsolete names, but I think the current state is enough to close this never-ending bug. | |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-02-01 14:18 | Florian Dold | New Issue | |
| 2017-02-02 07:42 | Florian Dold | Description Updated | |
| 2017-02-26 02:06 | Christian Grothoff | Priority | normal => high |
| 2017-02-26 02:06 | Christian Grothoff | Severity | minor => text |
| 2017-02-26 02:06 | Christian Grothoff | Status | new => implementing |
| 2017-02-26 02:06 | Christian Grothoff | Product Version | => git (master) |
| 2017-03-02 07:00 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0011878 | |
| 2017-03-02 07:01 | Christian Grothoff | Assigned To | => Marcello Stanisci |
| 2017-03-02 07:01 | Christian Grothoff | Status | implementing => assigned |
| 2017-03-02 07:01 | Christian Grothoff | Target Version | => 0.3 |
| 2017-03-02 07:04 | Christian Grothoff | Relationship added | related to 0004873 |
| 2017-03-02 10:34 | Marcello Stanisci | Note Added: 0011882 | |
| 2017-05-02 07:39 | Marcello Stanisci | Status | assigned => informing |
| 2017-05-02 07:39 | Marcello Stanisci | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2017-05-02 07:39 | Marcello Stanisci | Note Added: 0012092 | |
| 2017-05-03 00:16 | Christian Grothoff | Fixed in Version | => 0.3 |
| 2017-06-06 12:18 | Christian Grothoff | Status | informing => closed |