[FR] - make transaction build to balance automatically also the multi-assets
#3068
Comments
dorin100
added
enhancement
|
I would argue that this is not a feature enhancement, but a bug - I can't find any logical justification for why it would automatically balance ADA but not non-Ada tokens? It just means code that works with UTXOs containing only ADA inexplicably breaks for UTXOs containing non-Ada tokens. Really not expected behaviour at all. If you have left-over tokens of any kind, they should be outputted back to the change address, what is the justification for not doing this? |
|
Any updates? I think at least adding an option is a good idea |
|
cc @vfrsilva |
Apparently the core dev team at IOG have absolutely no interest in making life easier for us developers, or even explaining the rationale behind their dodgy decisions. This is the 2nd or 3rd ticket I've raised over an silly issue like this which is causing unnecessary confusion and roadblocks to new Cardano developers. Every time I raise an issue, I either get ignored, or I get push back - took months to make any progress on the incompatibility between Serialization-lib and Cardano-CLI transactions - I suspect because dev team bury their heads in the sand. Honestly, I like Cardano, I think it's a good system with a good community, and I'm personally very heavily invested it in it, but the process of developing for Cardano is way harder than it needs to be, and IOG needs to pull their fingers out, start listening to your developers, respond to them and try to make the platform easier to develop on - Cardano will lose to other cryptos if this doesn't happen, that is already happening. Why develop for a platform that's harder than others, written in a language nobody knows (Haskell) and with a core development team who seem to have no interest in making life easier for their development community? |
`cardano-cli transaction build` was supposed to abstract all the low level building of ``cardano-cli transaction build-raw`, however it does not support balancing NFTs. Therefore, we currently need to revert back to using `cardano-cli transaction build-raw` and manually calculate the fees and balance the change address. See issue: IntersectMBO/cardano-node#3068
|
I just hit this issue, is there any workaround? change-address should handle the balance to both ADA and non-ADA assets. |
|
Same problem here. Any final solution or workaround available? |
|
What errors are you all getting and what version of cardano-node/-cli are you using? For me the balancing of non-Ada values works. |
|
I get this error: My cardano-cli version: |
|
cardano-cli 1.34.1 - linux-x86_64 - ghc-8.10 This is what I found: the change-address works if you spend all the assets from the utxo. Now if you want to partial spend (say you have 30 and want to send 10 to another address), change address is not able to figure out that the remaining 20 must be sent to the change address specified in the tx. |
Yes, this is quite clearly a bug, I'm not sure why so much resistance to fixing it. |
|
How can we get more attention from IOG about this? |
|
Some news about this? |
|
Any new news? |
|
Recommend you go on Twitter and tag everyone with IOHK or IOG in their handle on a daily basis. Generally I think everyone is now using serialisation-lib for transaction generation now, although that's a world of pain in itself. So.. have fun 🙄🤦♂️ |
|
Any updates on this? Currently going through an EMURGO Plutus cohort where we're working with multiple assets. I agree with kieransimkin, I definitely expected --change-address to work with multiple assets, especially since there are very little technical differences between lovelace and all other native assets. Seems like a bug worth fixing. |
|
Dear all, we are finally working on this feature 🤓. We aim to have it ready ASAP. Hopefully we can have it ready for the Vasil maintenance release. |
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
dorin100
added
type: enhancement
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Previously we gave up when the non-Ada part of a transaction wasn't balanced. We now balance the transaction and correctly update the fee accordingly (since the fee will be higher). We also return an error in the case where the is non-Ada change, but not at least minUTxO change (e.g. in the case where the Ada is already balanced). Resolves: #3068
Internal/External
Internal if an IOHK staff member.
Area
Native Tokens Related to Native Tokens (Mary).
Plutus Related to Plutus Scripts (Alonzo).
Describe the feature you'd like
make
transaction buildto balance automatically also the multi-assets, not only the Lovelace UTXOsThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: