-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 51
Closed
Description
2022-12-05
PRs to refine/move to close
- alternate extension model PR#185
- not too controversial - let's merge it for now (or close because other PR includes all its commits)
- idempotency edit
- merged!
- opt/req PR#187 - Preview
sessionPropertiesrequiredNamespaces,optionalNamespaces- session -->
sessionNamespaces - merge conflicts
- sessionIdentifier --> sessionId
- - @bumblefudge will open a follow-on PR to mark for
Review(14-day merge tag)
Ongoing issues/topics
- CAIP-27 - advise please on what would is needed
- - sessionIdentifier-->sessionId
- - @HMB-88 will further PR
- Remaining Issues to ship CAIP-25
- Do today's PRs close
extensionsconsidered harmful or are there next steps we can recommend/require before close? - Accounts
- Are there account-free sessions? Are there account-required dapps or account-required sessions? Should there be a
sessionParamsproperty in CAIP-170 that allows this request/response to be part of a CAIP-25?- Pedro: wallet_ namespace might have an empty
accounts-mode - Oren: We can imagine use-cases for read-only methods thru provider, etc.
- Pedro: what if default is to allow empty
accounts, but 170 could include anadd_accountmethod? avoid flags
- Pedro: wallet_ namespace might have an empty
- any error codes needed?
- session property and wallet property should have own error co
- do CAIP-27s ever require an account, or change whether an account is authorized for a session? Can you request a method and get an account in the response?
- editorial PR needed to add
accountsassumptions to CAIP-25 text?
- Are there account-free sessions? Are there account-required dapps or account-required sessions? Should there be a
- Sessions - Are we comfortable with 25 shipping before 170? If so, should we make a wishlist or a to-do list for 170 at least?
- wallet namespace - Same question, anything urgent or do we keep this iterating in parallel after 25 goes to
Review?- Need separate
/namespace? - CAIP-25 should include warning that namespace can't be required and can't have chains? Pedro: Not necessary, implementer beware
- just stick wallet methods into a namespace?
- - @bumblefudge to open
draft PRissue forwallet_in/namespacesto collect input but not decide any time soon
- Need separate
- Do today's PRs close
- Multiple Wallets - blocker for merge to
Reviewor long-term issue to explore in parallel? If the former, tell Juan what to do next- leaving open but
Next Steps
Reactions are currently unavailable
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels