1331193800 Update psbt_signer example to use descriptor! macro (Steve Myers)
Pull request description:
### Description
This is a small fix to the psbt_signer example to also use the `descriptor!` macro.
### Notes to the reviewers
I also added more docs to at the beginning of the example.
### 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
#### New Example:
* [x] I've added docs for the new example
ACKs for top commit:
danielabrozzoni:
ACK 1331193800
Tree-SHA512: 602fa317313dea77bc4804abce500db33d5834625704019c6590ae6b80cf339cbaddffef667eaef2696e8e769756a2c2405c84109409ef33816db60d3df4d53d
d7bfe68e2d Fix broken nightly docs (Alekos Filini)
b11c86d074 Rename internal esplora modules, fix docs (Alekos Filini)
b5b92248c7 Rename esplora features to -async and -blocking (Alekos Filini)
cf2bc388f2 Re-export `esplora_client` (Elias Rohrer)
5baf46f84d Use the external esplora client library (Alekos Filini)
Pull request description:
### Description
Use the external esplora client crate now that it's published
### Changelog notice
- Start using the external esplora client crate
- Deprecate the `use-esplora-reqwest` and `use-esplora-ureq` features in favor of `use-esplora-async` and `use-esplora-blocking`
### 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
#### New Features:
* [ ] I've added tests for the new feature
* [ ] I've added docs for the new feature
#### Bugfixes:
* [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
* [ ] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
* [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR
ACKs for top commit:
notmandatory:
ACK d7bfe68e2d
Tree-SHA512: 23bd47536fe6f723602cbcc51d909eb9aed28376430f4453eea832e30a587be3d312cdca993d114391132bfb39c48637030f974ab1a742f7defe44f40a82ef8b
`Wallet` stores the descriptors' checksum in the database for safety.
Previously, the checksum used was a checksum of a descriptor that
already had a checksum.
This PR allows for backward-compatibility of databases created with this
bug.
If `exclude_hash` is set, we split the input data, and if a checksum
already existed within the original data, we check the calculated
checksum against the original checksum.
Additionally, the implementation of `IntoWalletDescriptor` for `&str`
has been refactored for clarity.
af0b3698c6 Fix `Wallet::descriptor_checksum` to actually return the checksum (志宇)
Pull request description:
### Description
`Wallet::descriptor_checksum` should return the checksum, not the descriptor without the checksum.
### Notes to the reviewers
Please merge.
### Changelog notice
Fix `Wallet::descriptor_checksum` to actually return the descriptor checksum.
### 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
#### Bugfixes:
~* [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API~
* [x] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
~* [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR~
ACKs for top commit:
danielabrozzoni:
ACK af0b3698c6 - I run the test you added with the old code, and verified that the bug was there. I then run the test (with a few more dbg!() expressions) and manually verified that the problem is fixed.
notmandatory:
ACK af0b3698c6
Tree-SHA512: 64a5b1f4708db6f6dcff2f6ef5e0a4c7d206e764d7602ea803c8cc002410326eb59eee770d9c91694dfbf07193ee3ff6bfe163bcbb3506cd7b2a6b59814a3e5c
e6f2d029fa Remove genesis_block lazy initialization (Shobit Beltangdy)
Pull request description:
### Description
This commit contains a change to address issue #752
cargo test runs successfully.
### Notes to the reviewers
Hi, newbie here learning Rust and BDK! I've removed the lazy_static block in this commit, and when learning about lazy_static also came across something called [once_cell](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/cell/struct.OnceCell.html), [soon to be available in stdlib](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/74465). It's like lazy_static but faster and is not a macro. Shall I keep the lazy_static and create an issue to switch to once_cell in the future, or remove the lazy_static (as I've done) and create an issue anyway?
#### 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
ACKs for top commit:
notmandatory:
ACK e6f2d029fa
Tree-SHA512: 528f5fdfb0d7d1f7a83869b7a0de1b25dfcfafae2671c9229cdb4e5d80d11e5578d9325b3d95555e59f5dfb4ed6304c0c112a01a56b6a596e50dd62e310c516e
e1fa0b6695 Fix the new release process (Alekos Filini)
Pull request description:
### Description
A few things I noticed while doing the 0.22 release.
Follow-up of #544
### 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)
ACKs for top commit:
notmandatory:
ACK e1fa0b6695
Tree-SHA512: 5e60e73ba1f820fc39f62b75583e1125f911e578ab7263a20636e2a995d0efa10ba1b3b66a1e03d8a2ed61e32c00b53de9d6bbdb31de94db37c79fa5acdbf483
e2bf9734b1 Remove redundant duplicated keys check (Alekos Filini)
Pull request description:
### Description
This check is redundant since it's already performed by miniscript (see https://docs.rs/miniscript/7.0.0/miniscript/miniscript/analyzable/enum.AnalysisError.html#variant.RepeatedPubkeys) and it was incorrectly failing on tr descriptors that contain duplicated keys across different taproot leaves
Fixes#760
### 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
#### Bugfixes:
* [x] This pull request breaks the existing API
* [x] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
* [x] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR
ACKs for top commit:
danielabrozzoni:
Code review ACK e2bf9734b1 - the code looks good to me, but I didn't test manually
Tree-SHA512: 3c557d741e34abf6336c7e257867f2c6f91a4be0024317af834f08ba7c0c64557bd74b643005254c9f04e953350b104b0d4d287f0d0528134b357a4adf580f87
97b6fb06aa Add a policy example (rajarshimaitra)
da7670801b Update compiler example. (rajarshimaitra)
Pull request description:
### Description
Fixes#729.
There is an "unmaintained" warning in a old version of clap, which triggered the issue.
Ideally, we should not have clap in bdk's dependency. It was only used for the `compiler.rs` example, which was a very tiny clap app compiling miniscript policies, and it wasn't really an example for bdk.
This PR rewrites the example as a `policy.rs` which demos the BDK's Policy module and policy structures.
- Use a `wsh(multi(2, Privkey, Pubkey))` descriptor, which has only one part private and other part public.
- use `into_wallet_descriptor()` to turn that into a `Descriptor` and `KeyMap`.
- Use the `KeyMap` to create a custom signer.
- Extract the descriptor `Policy` structure from the given keymap.
I am not very sure on how much this example is helpful. I still find it hard to read the Policy structure visually. But if Policy is something we want the user to know about descriptors and bdk wallets, this shows how to extract it for a simple multisig condition.
Note: There is no use of `bdk::wallet` in the example. BDK uses the Policy extraction internally while transaction creation. But all these are exposed publicly, so can be used independently too.
### Questions:
- Should we still have a `minscript::policy::compile()` example? Which IIUC is very different from `bdk::policy:Policy`. I didn't include it in this PR, because I am not sure if it fits inside bdk example categories.
- Should we expose `extract_policy` as an wallet API? All though its possible to get policy without creating a wallet, why not let the wallet also spit one out for itself, if its useful?
### 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
ACKs for top commit:
afilini:
ACK 97b6fb06aa
Tree-SHA512: 8e3719fdad308a347d22377050b2f29e02a884ff7d4e57a05a06d078de0709b5bf70bbcb1a696d1e1cdfe02cdb470e5af643da7c775b67fe318046bd6b80f440
54d768412a Sqlite migrations should either succeed or fail (Vladimir Fomene)
369e17b801 Add datatype for is_spent sqlite column (Vladimir Fomene)
Pull request description:
### Description
During table creation, Sqlite does not throw an error when a column datatype is not defined. In addition, the datatype provided during table creation does not put a constraint on the type of data that can be put in that column. So you can easily put a string value in an integer column. Despite this, I think it is important for us to add the datatype for clarity.
### Notes to the reviewers
You can read more about how Sqlite dynamic typing [here](https://www.sqlite.org/faq.html). I have amended our `migrate` code with a new commit. The idea is to run migrations in a transaction so that they either succeed or fail. This prevents us from having the database in an inconsistent state at any point in time.
### 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
#### Bugfixes:
* [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
* [ ] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
* [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR
ACKs for top commit:
rajarshimaitra:
tACK 54d768412a
afilini:
ACK 54d768412a
Tree-SHA512: bb6c0467f799ca917f8d45c6495b766352b3177fc81952fcdd678208abf092fdeae966686528a5dcb3f342d7171783274df6312a08cbef3580063e059f5f7254
5e9965fca7 Enable signing taproot transactions with only `non_witness_utxos` (Alekos Filini)
Pull request description:
### Description
Some wallets may only specify the `non_witness_utxo` for a PSBT input. If that's the case, BDK should still be able to sign.
This was pointed out in the discussion of #734
### Changelog notice
- Enable signing taproot transactions that only specify the `non_witness_utxo`
### 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
#### Bugfixes:
* [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
* [x] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
* [x] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR
ACKs for top commit:
danielabrozzoni:
tACK 5e9965fca7 - the code looks good to me, I played around with the test you provided (inspecting the PSBT, adding/removing the witness and non-witness utxos, etc) and everything works as expected.
Tree-SHA512: 2f205286263bfee4c76de8e8c81ae1349b1c3b255b72045488f8d629c05cab64c6f775307e831674dc036e5a3a760f95d9cdc1beaf48afb4c475aee838131a33
e65edbf53c Change parameter name of database in test funcs (Vladimir Fomene)
88307045b0 Add more test to the database module (Vladimir Fomene)
e06c3f945c Set tx field to none if `include_raw` is false (Vladimir Fomene)
Pull request description:
### Description
This PR add more test to the database module and also fixes certain bugs discovered by the written test. I also amended the name used for the database parameter in the test functions.
### Notes to the reviewers
This contributes to fixing #699
### Changelog notice
<!-- Notice the release manager should include in the release tag message changelog -->
<!-- See https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.0.0/ for examples -->
### 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
ACKs for top commit:
rajarshimaitra:
tACK e65edbf53c
danielabrozzoni:
Code review ACK e65edbf53c
Tree-SHA512: 1ac1475f7d63f25e94ef21342e6f6e243c34c8c9208d11a5492f224026055da2a96f20be83497c1ba361effff9861f4e68920f98feebaf4b201d205c7030c282
Some wallets may only specify the `non_witness_utxo` for a PSBT input.
If that's the case, BDK should still be able to sign.
This was pointed out in the discussion of #734
The current implementation of the `migrate` method for
Sqlite database does not rollback changes when there is
an error while running one of the migration scripts. This
can leave the database in an inconsistent state. This
change ensures that migrations either succeed completely
or fail.
8963e8c9f4 Improve docs w.r.t. PSBT finalization (Elias Rohrer)
Pull request description:
### Description
This PR includes just a few tiny changes to the docs trying to make it a bit more clear what PSBT finalization is and what to expect.
### Notes to the reviewers
### 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
ACKs for top commit:
afilini:
ACK 8963e8c9f4
Tree-SHA512: ea1a6c715c2832cdf3a428654fb8fad08a0549e46a808ca7a424590145fc2c40164ea08eb636ce5cd648dd6335480accd1d91f9e37e9397feaf0dac2015e8baa
ab41679368 Add fee_amount() and fee_rate() functions to PsbtUtils trait (Steve Myers)
Pull request description:
### Description
The purpose of the PR is to provide a more convenient way to calculate the transaction fee amount and fee rate for a PSBT. This PR adds `fee_amount` and `fee_rate` functions to the existing `PsbtUtils` trait and implements them for `PartiallySignedBitcoinTransaction`. The `fee_rate` value is only valid if the PSBT it is called on is fully signed and finalized.
See related discussion: https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk-ffi/issues/179
### Changelog
Added
- PsbtUtils.fee_amount(), calculates the PSBT total transaction fee amount in Sats.
- PsbtUtils.fee_rate(), calculates the PSBT FeeRate, the value is only accurate AFTER the PSBT is finalized.
### Notes to the reviewers
Ideally I'd like `fee_rate` to return an `Option` and return `None` if the PSBT isn't finalized. But I'm not quite sure how to determine if a PSBT is finalized without having a `Wallet` and running it through the finalize code first. Or there might be a way to fill in missing signatures with properly sized fake data prior to calculating the fee rate. For now I think it's enough to do this simple approach with usage warning in the rust docs.
### 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
#### New Features:
* [x] I've added tests for the new feature
* [x] I've added docs for the new feature
ACKs for top commit:
afilini:
ACK ab41679368
Tree-SHA512: 5386109c9ffcf63160f18b4c51eb2c582f4121b669c7276aaba489d186cf9b97343d46f887469b1407ccd7a24448b5e7aee4c6832d86768239b21f4e68054a0f
fa998de4b1 Add psbt_signer.rs example (Steve Myers)
Pull request description:
### Description
Adding a simple example of how to create a PSBT with a watch only wallet and then sign it with a signing wallet.
### Notes to the reviewers
This example was inspired by a question from a user.
### 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
#### New Features:
* [ ] I've added tests for the new feature
* [ ] I've added docs for the new feature
#### Bugfixes:
* [ ] This pull request breaks the existing API
* [ ] I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
* [ ] I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR
ACKs for top commit:
danielabrozzoni:
ACK fa998de4b1
afilini:
ACK fa998de4b1
Tree-SHA512: 2e178ee59ce94eb1e9b5616a499e106e1d2843589036bdb6cff2c987e280588ad9989b026cdbf01290cc60f02eccbc410a3e1d1cd45eb4b8ff04353ae31b23ea
`del_tx` pulls the TransactionDetails object using
`select_transaction_details_by_txid` method which gets the transaction
details' data with a non-None transaction field even if the
`include_raw` argument is `false`. So it becomes necessary to Set
the transaction field in transactiondetails to None in `del_tx`, when
we make a call to it with `include_raw=false`.
PsbtUtils.fee_amount(), calculates the PSBT total transaction fee amount in Sats.
PsbtUtils.fee_rate(), calculates the PSBT FeeRate, the value is only accurate AFTER the PSBT is finalized.
aa0ea6aeff codecov: warn about missing features (Daniela Brozzoni)
c3a7bbb3ff codecov: slightly change the test features (Daniela Brozzoni)
1c4d47825b Run code coverage on every PR (Daniela Brozzoni)
Pull request description:
### 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
ACKs for top commit:
notmandatory:
ACK aa0ea6aeff
afilini:
ACK aa0ea6aeff
Tree-SHA512: c2d0d9ad1e956f1c1808b46394f810939154442534241f9a023f18173910339ac236a5b6c66f78207dd2cb90a8f18000fc057b960e3354e2882c627fe1ef2c9f
0010ecd94a Add badge to README (wszdexdrf)
690411722e Change configs for source-base code coverage (wszdexdrf)
Pull request description:
### Description
This also changes the code coverage front end to coveralls instead of codecov, which had some issues with other changes in the PR. This will provide better and more accurate code coverage reports.
### Notes to the reviewers
The tests run before generating the report are not exhaustive (not exhaustive earlier too, but I added as many as I could), and hence the report won't be 100% accurate.
### 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
ACKs for top commit:
danielabrozzoni:
ACK 0010ecd94a
Tree-SHA512: 04a21b7481b80287cf8a31276238b0a5958871310664363f54d53779bb2dda6f49198baaf3b5471667fa6131443b022aabd86f2e3b1cfcf5d4aacadf137a166e
d7163c3a97 Update electrum-client to 0.11.0 (Alekos Filini)
Pull request description:
### Description
Update electrum-client to 0.11.0
### Changelog notice
- Updated `electrum-client` to `0.11.0`
### 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
#### New Features:
* [ ] I've added tests for the new feature
* [ ] I've added docs for the new feature
* [x] I've updated `CHANGELOG.md`
ACKs for top commit:
danielabrozzoni:
utACK d7163c3a97
Tree-SHA512: 3be61935e2bebfc5e4b530d17b9900e3c1bd2ef377fdd18df4303de713b124d51555f48f7aff5f4c2579105e86f52480e6b3f2af9c7494cbdb1dd2a2c5b4e0da
