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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix anoncreds proof request #127

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 26, 2023
Merged

fix anoncreds proof request #127

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
52e12ff
fix(anoncreds): proof, rev reg def id
burdettadam May 24, 2023
bfacecd
fix: remove redundant get_revocation_registry_definitions() function …
cjhowland May 26, 2023
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
13 changes: 8 additions & 5 deletions aries_cloudagent/protocols/present_proof/indy/pres_exch_handler.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -120,14 +120,17 @@ async def _get_ledger_objects(self, credentials: dict):
if credential.get("rev_reg_id"):
revocation_registry_id = credential["rev_reg_id"]
if revocation_registry_id not in revocation_registries:
rev_reg = (
await anoncreds_registry.get_revocation_registry_definition(
self._profile, revocation_registry_id
)
).revocation_registry.serialize()
# add id to the serialized rev_reg
rev_reg["id"] = revocation_registry_id
revocation_registries[
revocation_registry_id
] = RevocationRegistry.from_definition(
(
await anoncreds_registry.get_revocation_registry_definition(
self._profile, revocation_registry_id
)
).revocation_registry.serialize(),
rev_reg,
True,
)
return schemas, cred_defs, revocation_registries
Comment on lines +123 to 136
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should replace use of RevocationRegistry with RevRegDef; this causes a small cascade of changes needed up the stack from where this method is called but it shouldn't be too painful of a refactor. See 81ab818#diff-fd952db170fd7d5742268e460f9e739c3e9106a06f4e6e2556a634074841977aL447-R396

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We will address this in a separate set of changes

Expand Down
Loading