Ian Costanzo

PS failing test: `FAILED aries_cloudagent/messaging/models/light_webhook.py::FLAKE8`

> I’m suggesting that we want the default to be the terse form, and only if needed use the long form. I think this would be fine, however if we...

> > adds additional meta-data to the wallet DID, to flag a did:peer for re-using in invitations > > Perhaps this should also allow flagging ledger-based (published/public) DIDs? E.g. any...

> The requirement for reuse in the spec. is that the `service` item in the invitation be a DID -- not a JSON structure such as happens with an unqualified...

For `did:peer:4` should the connection use the long form or short form of the did? ``` "my_did": "did:peer:4zQmbCiTt4dS2XZz9BMGYpZTKH92mYzq9Q1cavQPtfrFEfiV", "their_did": "did:peer:4zQmUpGK93RFrakSGmJbwL9QJXqs4uC2S8NQeSyzcomCqKzz", ``` vs ... ``` "my_did": "did:peer:4zQmbCiTt4dS2XZz9BMGYpZTKH92mYzq9Q1cavQPtfrFEfiV: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", "their_did": "did:peer:4zQmUwLj6dLCg2Sv9YirbFkzwFaMyRvmoqSn5Pge9fdP9ATi: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", ```

Integration tests have failed twice in a row, so I ran them locally and everything passed.

> @ianco do we care that we don't have codecov? should we worry if we actually covered all the new stuff? Personally I'm not too concerned about the level of...

> We did pass the integration tests which run alice-faber so we should be close now...just need the real presentation format maybe There aren't any integration tests for the new...

> As currently structured, this strictly supports only AnonCreds format, right? In the future, what will be required to add support for issuing, say, DIP-VC or JWT-VC? Is there anything...

> 4\. I'm still unsure if anything needs to happen with `indy` wallets. I'm having trouble installing the library to test. I don't think we need to do anything with...