go/oasis-node/cmd: Add oasis-node stake account nonce CLI command

[tjanez]

It can be used to get a staking account's current nonce.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3559 (bdceea5) into master (c0f8364) will decrease coverage by 0.09%.
The diff coverage is 63.15%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3559      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   66.56%   66.46%   -0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         377      377              
  Lines       34273    34288      +15     
==========================================
- Hits        22813    22791      -22     
- Misses       8183     8189       +6     
- Partials     3277     3308      +31     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
go/oasis-node/cmd/stake/account.go	56.93% <63.15%> (-0.29%)	⬇️
go/oasis-node/cmd/common/metrics/disk.go	65.38% <0.00%> (-19.24%)	⬇️
go/oasis-node/cmd/common/metrics/resource.go	78.94% <0.00%> (-10.53%)	⬇️
go/common/sgx/aesm/aesm.go	62.61% <0.00%> (-6.55%)	⬇️
go/worker/common/committee/runtime_host.go	65.04% <0.00%> (-4.86%)	⬇️
go/runtime/tagindexer/tagindexer.go	66.27% <0.00%> (-4.66%)	⬇️
go/storage/mkvs/lookup.go	72.04% <0.00%> (-4.31%)	⬇️
go/worker/keymanager/watcher.go	60.00% <0.00%> (-3.34%)	⬇️
go/storage/mkvs/iterator.go	80.29% <0.00%> (-2.92%)	⬇️
.../consensus/tendermint/apps/roothash/state/state.go	74.28% <0.00%> (-2.86%)	⬇️
... and 23 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c0f8364...bdceea5. Read the comment docs.

[ptrus]

Just wondering what's the use case for this, since the stake account info command already includes this in response?

The only thing i can come up with is using this in some automation - which i think we actually want to discourage and instead defer to the grpc api.

[tjanez]

Just wondering what's the use case for this, since the stake account info command already includes this in response?

The use case I have in mind is to have an elegant way of getting an account's nonce instead of having to parse the stake account info command's response which is not guaranteed to stay stable.

The only thing i can come up with is using this in some automation - which i think we actually want to discourage and instead defer to the grpc api.

You guessed it 🙂. I've had some occasions where it was the most convenient to just write a simple Bash script to generate, sign and submit a batch of staking transactions.

Something like a more proper Go program acting as a gRPC client and a CLI would be nice, but out of scope for these smallish projects.

So, I would say that we probably don't want to discourage all such usage of our CLI tools, just not relying on their output being stable and using them to actually write a backend, e.g. a gateway, a staking dashboard, ...