DR docs command correction and clarification #2680
Open
+15
−1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
tarikBensalem-DA
had a problem deploying
to
ci-forks
GitHub Actions
Error
Signed-off-by: tarikBensalem-DA <[email protected]>
tarikBensalem-DA
force-pushed
the
docsClarification
branch
from
7dd893a to
06abca3
Compare
tarikBensalem-DA
requested a deployment
to
ci-forks
GitHub Actions
Waiting
isegall-da
reviewed
Oct 15, 2025
| val participantId = participant.id // ID of the new participant | ||
| participant.topology.party_to_participant_mappings.propose(<party-id>, Seq((participantId, <participant-permission>)), store = syncId) | ||
| For this command a list of all parties can be found by running <party-id> can be found by first running: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| For this command a list of all parties can be found by running <party-id> can be found by first running: | |
| You can list all parties that are currently on the old node by running: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What extra information does below command give us compared to the party_to_participant_mappings.list above?
isegall-da
reviewed
Oct 15, 2025
| val partyId = parties(<index>).party | ||
| The available options for <participant-permission> are ``Submission``, ``Confirmation``, and ``Observation``. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd move this to the top of this, right after the propose command, as it directly explains that one.
martinflorian-da
added
the
static
| val syncId = participant.synchronizers.list_connected().head.synchronizerId | ||
| participant.topology.party_to_participant_mappings.list(syncId, filterNamespace = <namespace>) | ||
| participant.topology.party_to_participant_mappings.list(syncId, filterParticipant = <namespace>) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the context for this change?
We're interested in potentially multiple participants here, so filterNamespace seems like the right pick?
| val parties = participant.parties.list (<participantIdentifier>) | ||
| Then you can map the party to a variable using a command asa such where <index> is the 0 based index of the party in the list: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sentence looks broken
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Pull Request Checklist
Cluster Testing
/cluster_teston this PR to request it, and ping someone with access to the DA-internal system to approve it./hdm_teston this PR to request it, and ping someone with access to the DA-internal system to approve it.PR Guidelines
Fixes #n, and mention issues worked on using#nMerge Guidelines