feat: send payment transaction with algokit core

[CiottiGiorgio]

(draft) PR to use AlgoKit Core when dealing with a Payment transaction in utils.

Companion PR of algorandfoundation/algokit-utils-ts#393

[CiottiGiorgio]

At this point, the local AlgoKit Core this is using is from algorandfoundation/algokit-core#81

[aorumbayev]

some minor comments, would also be keen to see how it behaves in CI, would be interesting to compare execution time for tests on version with and without these changes. I think you need to patch merge conflict first to have workflows executed

[CiottiGiorgio]

At this point, I have added the ability for utils to send all transactions through the generated API client. I had initially aimed for just payments but I got carried away and did it for everything.
Also, the header update is a dirty trick for now while I understand how to use the api key correctly.

[aorumbayev]

@CiottiGiorgio i noticed tests are failing in resource packing suite. The root cause is due to the fact that now calls are done via our oas client, while it throws similar errors from algod its a different exception, you'd need to adjust error handling in logic_error.py, to ensure regex searches over entire error string

    match = re.search(LOGIC_ERROR, error_str, re.DOTALL) # add re.DOTALL, and change re.match to re.search

and the exception handlers would also need to catch the error class from new oas client

under transaction_composer.py's send method

  except algosdk.error.AlgodHTTPError as e:
            raise Exception(f"Transaction failed: {e}") from e

should handle the algokit_algod_api.exceptions.BadRequestException as well

[aorumbayev]

@CiottiGiorgio looks like you need to do poetry update setuptools to fix pip audit step. The non pypi package might need to be excluded explicitly as well (if you run it locally you can confirm if its a warning or treated as an error as well)

[neilcampbell]

This logic has been updated in utils-ts to also perform fee calculations via algokit-transact. See algorandfoundation/algokit-utils-ts#407

[lempira]

Updated to use assign_fee from ak-core

[CiottiGiorgio]

At this point I think this PR is mostly good to go minus:

• fee estimation should be done with core
• more care in evaluating whether the core can send all transactions instead of just payments
• the failing tests are due to the latest localnet where the node returns something different wrt boxes

I'll point out that I've explicitly told poetry to test the non-experimental version of this package in CI/CD and that I've also silenced a lot of mypy/ruff errors in the bridge code relating to how the signatures are untyped (since algosdk signatures are also untyped, I thought this was ok).
The experimental version on this package still passes the same tests that the non-experimental version passes (minus the ones that are at the moment related to the new algod box API).

[github-actions]

Coverage Report

File	Stmts	Miss	Cover	Missing
src/algokit_utils
_debugging.py	141	18	87%	21, 40–42, 45, 54, 62, 81, 87, 96, 110–114, 133, 141–143
account.py	3	3	0%	1–12
algorand.py	98	15	85%	64–65, 79–80, 110–111, 125–127, 138–139, 299, 322, 338, 357
application_client.py	3	3	0%	1–11
application_specification.py	7	7	0%	1–39
config.py	78	29	63%	23, 30–34, 73–74, 90, 95, 100, 111–116, 140–156
deploy.py	3	3	0%	1–10
logic_error.py	3	3	0%	1–10
src/algokit_utils/_legacy_v2
_ensure_funded.py	72	1	99%	96
_transfer.py	72	3	96%	14, 77–78
account.py	93	13	86%	15–18, 71–75, 109, 126, 156, 159, 203
application_client.py	537	77	86%	56–57, 176, 181, 210, 320, 325–326, 328, 330, 799, 814, 832–835, 929, 969, 981, 994, 1036, 1096–1102, 1106–1111, 1113, 1149, 1156, 1269, 1305, 1319, 1357–1359, 1361, 1371–1428, 1439–1444, 1464–1467
asset.py	80	4	95%	24–27
common.py	13	1	92%	13
deploy.py	407	22	95%	32–35, 170, 174–175, 193, 249, 339–340, 361, 395, 406–414, 429, 437, 593–594, 618
network_clients.py	73	5	93%	79–80, 105–106, 139
src/algokit_utils/accounts
account_manager.py	255	40	84%	167, 183–184, 211–216, 295–305, 322, 339–344, 391–393, 422, 461, 481–485, 498, 557, 578, 735, 841, 920, 925, 940–941, 964
kmd_account_manager.py	73	10	86%	47–53, 94, 150, 157
src/algokit_utils/applications
abi.py	139	71	49%	14, 75, 111, 117, 119, 121, 125–126, 141–160, 176, 179–185, 201–214, 227–239, 254–265
app_client.py	742	214	71%	66–74, 133, 141, 328–331, 334, 337, 340, 343, 355–358, 361, 364, 367, 370, 382, 391, 400, 403–470, 483–541, 565–567, 584–587, 595–598, 606–609, 617–620, 628–631, 642–645, 658, 754–757, 791, 803, 815, 827, 839, 854, 869, 879, 889, 899, 909, 919, 956–969, 985, 1002, 1019, 1036, 1057, 1078, 1168, 1364, 1428–1429, 1478, 1480, 1486, 1539–1547, 1580–1583, 1586–1589, 1610, 1658, 1721–1723, 1736–1743, 1788, 1805, 1807, 1810, 1814, 1961, 1972–1973, 2001, 2011–2013, 2016–2038, 2048, 2057–2072, 2077–2082
app_deployer.py	237	37	84%	96, 270, 277, 287–292, 295–299, 375–376, 587, 599–613, 625, 630–633, 642, 656, 663, 670, 699, 710–751
app_factory.py	271	27	90%	430, 451, 460, 652, 662, 712, 944, 958–963, 974–975, 1008, 1046, 1064–1065, 1108, 1116–1129
app_manager.py	223	18	92%	258, 279–280, 350–351, 396–401, 433, 457–458, 488, 516–519, 551, 560
src/algokit_utils/applications/app_spec
arc32.py	95	8	92%	198–207
arc56.py	578	32	94%	71, 171, 292, 308–309, 379, 399–401, 453, 462, 464, 736, 750, 909, 911, 944–955, 968, 970–971, 987
src/algokit_utils/assets
asset_manager.py	128	12	91%	282–283, 292, 298–322, 332
src/algokit_utils/clients
_algokit_core_bridge.py	21	1	95%	11
client_manager.py	182	55	70%	25–27, 80–87, 112, 124, 149–151, 211, 222–225, 250, 289, 324–329, 364–366, 399, 416, 438, 483–486, 526–529, 570–573, 610–613, 635–660, 698, 711, 723
dispenser_api_client.py	96	12	88%	134–135, 139–142, 198–200, 219–221
src/algokit_utils/errors
logic_error.py	56	11	80%	14, 105–121
src/algokit_utils/models
account.py	92	15	84%	32, 34, 80–81, 128, 136, 144, 168–175, 188, 196, 209, 217
amount.py	106	17	84%	35, 42, 88, 98, 104, 112, 117–119, 126, 131–133, 140, 147, 160, 166
application.py	66	1	98%	8
state.py	41	5	88%	61, 65–68
transaction.py	51	3	94%	66, 86, 91
src/algokit_utils/protocols
account.py	11	2	82%	17, 22
typed_clients.py	24	4	83%	12–24
src/algokit_utils/transactions
_algokit_core_bridge.py	16	1	94%	32
transaction_composer.py	1115	113	90%	38–45, 578, 623, 626, 631, 635–646, 678, 719, 786, 793, 815, 854, 951–980, 1009, 1027–1029, 1035–1050, 1055, 1063, 1065, 1067, 1083, 1089, 1127, 1135, 1148, 1244, 1294, 1743–1744, 1783–1784, 1825, 1867, 1878, 2048, 2051, 2070, 2075, 2099–2101, 2138–2174, 2181–2188, 2271, 2332, 2336, 2467, 2469–2470, 2520–2521
transaction_creator.py	75	7	91%	394, 427, 482, 520, 557, 590, 688
transaction_sender.py	161	10	94%	99, 268, 311–312, 710–715, 720–721, 886
TOTAL	6767	933	86%

Tests	Skipped	Failures	Errors	Time
405	0 💤	0 ❌	0 🔥	4m 1s ⏱️

[CiottiGiorgio]

Algod recently rolled back the changes on the box api, thereby restoring the tests involved with it. Still missing the changes related to fee estimation done on core.

[aorumbayev]

@CiottiGiorgio i think a good final smoke test would be to pick a few algokit repos relying of utils like subscriber py (i think it leverages it mostly in unit tests), generator py, algokit cli and run their test suites with the new wheel

[lempira]

@CiottiGiorgio I think a good final smoke test would be to pick a few algokit repos relying on utils like subscriber py (I think it leverages it mostly in unit tests), generator py, algokit cli, and run their test suites with the new wheel

@aorumbayev, I checked subscriber, client-gen, and algokit-cli test using the new whl and they all passed.