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

multi: Add label to PublishTransaction #1411

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

gijswijs
Copy link
Contributor

This PR chanegs the label used for Txs published to the network. Before, all Txs got the label tapd-asset-minting. Now, the label depends on the context. Currently we use two labels:

  • tapd-asset-minting
  • tapd-asset-send

In the future we could even allow for more granular information being passed to the label.

Copy link
Contributor

@ffranr ffranr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IMO, we should use

tapd-asset-transfer
tapd-asset-issuance

to align with our proof type terminology.

And maybe even?

TAP-transfer
TAP-issuance

@guggero
Copy link
Member

guggero commented Feb 25, 2025

I vote for:

tapd-asset-transfer
tapd-asset-issuance

@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 13523214868

Details

  • 6 of 6 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 4 files are covered.
  • 14 unchanged lines in 5 files lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage increased (+0.04%) to 54.516%

Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
commitment/tap.go 1 85.0%
address/mock.go 2 88.24%
asset/group_key.go 2 72.65%
itest/multisig.go 3 97.43%
proof/courier.go 6 79.37%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 13458097225: 0.04%
Covered Lines: 48736
Relevant Lines: 89398

💛 - Coveralls

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: 🏗 In progress
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants