feat: add seq_num as an option for transactions #1702
Conversation
| @@ -148,6 +148,7 @@ Deploy builtin Soroban Asset Contract | |||
| * `--cost` — Output the cost execution to stderr | |||
| * `--instructions <INSTRUCTIONS>` — Number of instructions to simulate | |||
| * `--build-only` — Build the transaction and only write the base64 xdr to stdout | |||
| * `--sequence-number <SEQUENCE_NUMBER>` — Optionally set the sequence number for the transaction; default is the current sequence number of the source account incremented by one | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After playing with this new option, I think we should change the design.
The new option is not really usable where it is in a meaningful way without being coupled with --build-only. The reason being is that any use where the tx will be sent immediately really just needs to use the current sequence number plus one. The only need for setting a different sequence number occurs when building and later sending.
Since the option is only usable in that advanced build-only case, I think we should make this something they can do with the stellar tx ... commands. It will keep the options advertised smaller for each of the subcommands being changed here, and keeps the advanced functionality for tx modifications in the same place. Maybe as a way to simply change a sequence number stellar tx set seq, where those commands could grow to support others like stellar tx set source-account. Or maybe by using the stellar tx edit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think stellar tx edit is a good place for this ^
We can also allow to modify the fee in tx edit
There was a problem hiding this comment.
stellar tx edit was envisioned as a interactive editor, where I think the thing @willemneal is adding here is more of a non-interactive modification of the transaction. Both things have a place, and for the non-interactive modification I think it's helpful to think about the user api being modifying a single thing, similar to how stellar tx op add modifies one thing by adding a single tx and that's why I suggest a stellar tx set, something that is separate to the interactive modification.
|
I totally agree! |
No description provided.