* Introduce `GraphedTx` struct to access transaction data of graphed
transactions.
* Ability to insert/access anchors and "seen at" values for graphed
transactions.
* `Additions` now records changes to anchors and last_seen_at.
We prepare the BDK repo for a major restructuring 🔥. This PR maintains the existing wallet API as much as possible and adds very little.
## Things Done
- database modules removed
- blockchain gutted but new esplora syncing code added (this will be gone soon hopefully).
- minimal API changes.
- Many macros removed.
- no longer applicable examples removed.
- Much conditional compilation removed. Can compile with `--all-features` now.
- All wallet tests passing
- TestClient moved into its own repo
- Example using `esplora`
## APIs changed
- wallet no longer has a `sync` method. This is replaced with `apply_wallet_scan`.
- address "caching" is gone. You can just change the derivation index with `ensure_derived_up_to` which sets your derivation to at least the argument. Unlike `ensure_addresses_cached` used to do this will alter what getting a new address gives you.
- `AddressIndex::Reset` is gone. This thing didn't make much sense and is hard to do with the more sane internals we've established. Changing the derivation index changes what script pubkeys the wallet will search so this is dangerous. We plan to add method like `trim_unused` which lowers the derivation index to the highest unused index. Applications must handle giving out old addresses manually now (which I think is good).
## Unfinished work
- [x] esplora example doesn't work for mempool transactions yet (seems like our esplora in testclient doesn't index mempool??).
- [x] we need to figure out a way to retrieve and store transaction timestamps (we're currently just setting them to `u64::MAX`). In `bdk_core` we never got around to doing this but it needs to be done.
- [x] A few insights we got from doing this PR should be applied to bdk_core first.
- [x] doctests not working.
### Notes to the reviewers
Try not to review the actual changes. This PR will be forced pushed a bit so it will be likely wasted.
I think I did a faithful job of translating the tests. A bit of review here would be helpful.
I *do* think it would be good to merge this PR soon into the v1 branch so we have something to work off once unfinished work is done.
Checking out the branch and poke around and give feedback would be the most helpful thing.
* [x] I've signed all my commits
* [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
* [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing
#### Bugfixes:
* [x] This pull request breaks the existing API
* [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR (there's too many!)
Add `wallet_esplora_async` example and various fixes
Fixes include:
* Allow `bdk_esplora` to use async with tls
* Reorganize `bdk_esplora` crate to have separate files for
async vs blocking
* Use optional dependencies for `bdk_esplora` async
Vladimir Fomene [Tue, 7 Mar 2023 14:04:06 +0000 (17:04 +0300)]
Implement EsploraExt for Async client
Creates a separate async EsploraAsyncExt trait for the
async client using async-trait crate. It has thesame
methods as the EsploraExt trait for the blocking client.
This trait is implemented on the AsyncClient of the
rust-esplora-client crate.
Changed `inflate_update` logic to not depend on `Cow`
As mentioned by @LLFourn:
1. We have a "sparse chain" from which there is a subset of txids M that are missing from graph.
2. There is also another subset C that are in the graph but their positions have changed.
3. We used the Cow to avoid copying/duplicating in memory transactions in subset C and M
Instead in inflate_update we could remove transactions in subset M and just clone data in subset C (which is usually tiny).
Checksum test was giving a false positive due to ignoring the return value.
Other tests were giving assertion fail later in the test, rather than an error on failed method call, thus making it more challenging to debug the issue.
These have been discovered, when implementing PostgreSQL backend in a downstream fork.
### Checklists
#### All Submissions:
* [x] I've signed all my commits
* [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
* [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing
* [x] I ran all `sqlite` and `key-value-db` tests successfully
This is in preparation for making a patch release and will be cherry picked to the release/0.27 branch. See #868.
### Changelog notice
### Checklists
#### All Submissions:
* [x] I've signed all my commits
* [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
* [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing
Fix #866 by updating `rusqlite` dependency version from `0.27.0` to `0.28.0` to fix [RUSTSEC-2022-0090](https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2022-0090).
### Notes to the reviewers
This will also need to be cherry-picked to the `release/0.27` branch to create a new `0.27.1` release.
### Changelog notice
Changed
* Update rusqlite version from 0.27.0 to 0.28.0 to fix [RUSTSEC-2022-0090](https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2022-0090).
### Checklists
#### All Submissions:
* [x] I've signed all my commits
* [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
* [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing
Checksum test was giving a false positive due to ignoring the return
value.
Other tests were giving assertion fail later in the test, rather than
an error on failed method call, thus making it more challenging to
debug the issue.
These have been discovered, when implementing PostgreSQL backend in
a downstream fork.
Ledger emulator used to default to `-model nanos` but in latest release we need to add it to the command line. This change fixes `test_hardware_wallet` CI tests.
### Notes to the reviewers
I originally made this fix in the `release/0.27` branch, this PR cherry-picks the change back to the `master` branch. I should have done a `master` branch PR first but it's only a CI change and I wanted to get the `0.27.0` release out.
### Changelog notice
None.
### Checklists
#### All Submissions:
* [x] I've signed all my commits
* [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
* [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing
A new [`rust-miniscript` release 9.0](https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-miniscript/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#900---november-5-2022) came out on Nov 14, updating to it to pickup the bug fixes. Also updating dependency`hwi` to new `0.5` version which used the `9.0` version of `rust-miniscript`.
### Notes to the reviewers
This new version of `rust-miniscript` uses the same version of `rust-bitcoin` we are on, 0.29.1.
### Changelog notice
Update rust-miniscript dependency to latest bug fix release 9.0.
### Checklists
#### All Submissions:
* [x] I've signed all my commits
* [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
* [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing
### Description
Very small fixes to documentation:
1. I got a DM last week from a user who thought we had a bug with our timestamps. It turns out he was using the milliseconds version of the Unix timestamp in his project and didn't realize we were giving out a standard Unix timestamp. The docs now mention this explicitly.
2. I noticed some small inconsistencies in the documentation on the public templates while porting them over to Kotlin. This PR also fixes that so that all templates use a common documentation wording.
### Checklists
#### All Submissions:
* [x] I've signed all my commits
* [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
* [x] I ran `cargo fmt` and `cargo clippy` before committing
projects / bdk / log