Skip to content
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

Reference the proposal in the agreement JSON returned by the API #3204

Open
grisha87 opened this issue Apr 29, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Reference the proposal in the agreement JSON returned by the API #3204

grisha87 opened this issue Apr 29, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
sdk-request issue requested by SDK team

Comments

@grisha87
Copy link
Contributor

Why?

When we request the agreement details via the Market API, it contains the offer and the demand, but there's no trace of the proposal or proposalId that was used as a basis for this agreement. This makes it troublesome to validate the terms of the agreement after it is set up. We negotiate the proposal, possibly agreeing on different terms of service in the negotiation process and then the information about these terms are lost after this proposal gets promoted to an agreement.

What we need to change?

I think we have two options:

  1. The proposal object becomes another porpery of the agreement, next to demand, offer. It could be named terms.
  2. The agreement exposes a new proposalId property, and we're allowed to get this proposal from the API - which is not possible right now, because the last proposal is coming from a provider, and attempting to get that proposal by ID ends up with a HTTP error returned by yagna.

Acceptance Criteria

  • It is possible for us to access the terms/conditions that were taken from the proposal in the agreement including the proposalId used.
@grisha87 grisha87 added the sdk-request issue requested by SDK team label Apr 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
sdk-request issue requested by SDK team
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant