Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
peer did 2/3 resolution #2472
peer did 2/3 resolution #2472
Changes from 31 commits
2f5cb46
0eeb254
36b0681
57395db
c4dd42f
b18457f
a824f04
ca866f7
2f1ca5e
fdf14ba
990ca08
dbccf5a
580ef8b
c737152
7f9a826
0494462
1404fcc
76b9a41
3c2b499
5f202a4
ff18579
557df3e
70809c4
1a0dc62
f6d5d07
b888c4a
bb9244b
3bcd14f
c46a668
a2be744
a260f19
d779b8a
07a54c0
8248ec0
61e0dd5
e51d803
b50c2bd
7ee1370
46857b8
2335732
e2cb29e
48836d7
4518dc5
3b6b382
bf23cbf
3ab76ef
8a1178e
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This workaround is painful but given that peer did creators won't necessarily generate the same ids for their verification methods that our library does (since it's not defined in the spec) means we can't avoid this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yea.... it's jank.. but because it's from a peer_did we know exactly what transformation needs to happen.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sicpa-dlab/peer-did-python#63
I also opened an issue in the peer-did-python library pointing out my need for this workaround.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This method is a copy paste from the base connection manager. While I recommended not leaving doc storage and retrieval to the base connection manager, I would recommend leaving the key -> did -> connection management to the base connection manager.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it appropriate to instantiate an instance of the base manage to call these methods. I wasn't sure if that would look weirder. easy enough change to make if that is the preferred separation of concerns
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I think instantiating an instance of the base connection manager is acceptable. I think it's better to have the explicit dependency than the implicit one we have by writing to the same records in the wallet.