sdcreceipt 4.0.0__tar.gz

sdcreceipt-4.0.0/LICENSE

@@ -0,0 +1,201 @@
+                                 Apache License
+                           Version 2.0, January 2004
+                        http://www.apache.org/licenses/
+
+   TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
+
+   1. Definitions.
+
+      "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,
+      and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.
+
+      "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by
+      the copyright owner that is granting the License.
+
+      "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
+      other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common
+      control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
+      "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
+      direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
+      otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
+      outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.
+
+      "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
+      exercising permissions granted by this License.
+
+      "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,
+      including but not limited to software source code, documentation
+      source, and configuration files.
+
+      "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
+      transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
+      not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
+      and conversions to other media types.
+
+      "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
+      Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
+      copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
+      (an example is provided in the Appendix below).
+
+      "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
+      form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
+      editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
+      represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
+      of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
+      separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
+      the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
+
+      "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
+      the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions
+      to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
+      submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner
+      or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of
+      the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted"
+      means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent
+      to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to
+      communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
+      and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the
+      Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
+      excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
+      designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution."
+
+      "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity
+      on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
+      subsequently incorporated within the Work.
+
+   2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
+      publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
+      Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
+
+   3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,
+      use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
+      where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
+      by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
+      Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
+      with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
+      institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
+      cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
+      or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
+      or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
+      granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
+      as of the date such litigation is filed.
+
+   4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
+      Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
+      modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
+      meet the following conditions:
+
+      (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
+          Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
+
+      (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
+          stating that You changed the files; and
+
+      (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
+          that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
+          attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
+          excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
+          the Derivative Works; and
+
+      (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
+          distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
+          include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
+          within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
+          pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
+          of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
+          as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
+          documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
+          within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
+          wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
+          of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
+          do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
+          notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
+          or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
+          that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
+          as modifying the License.
+
+      You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
+      may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
+      for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
+      for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
+      reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
+      the conditions stated in this License.
+
+   5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
+      any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
+      by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
+      this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
+      Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
+      the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
+      with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
+
+   6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
+      names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
+      except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
+      origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
+
+   7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
+      agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
+      Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+      WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
+      implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions
+      of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
+      PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
+      appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
+      risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.
+
+   8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
+      whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
+      unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
+      negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
+      liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,
+      incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
+      result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
+      Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
+      work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
+      other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
+      has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
+
+   9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
+      the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
+      and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
+      or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
+      License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
+      on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
+      of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
+      defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
+      incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason
+      of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.
+
+   END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
+
+   APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.
+
+      To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
+      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
+      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
+      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
+      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
+      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
+      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
+      identification within third-party archives.
+
+   Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
+
+   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+   You may obtain a copy of the License at
+
+       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+
+   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+   limitations under the License.

sdcreceipt-4.0.0/PKG-INFO

@@ -0,0 +1,211 @@
+Metadata-Version: 2.4
+Name: sdcreceipt
+Version: 4.0.0
+Summary: Verify and settle VSL Settlement Receipts. No account, no network for verification.
+Author: Axius SDC, Inc.
+License: Apache-2.0
+Project-URL: Homepage, https://github.com/SemanticDataCharter/sdcreceipt
+Keywords: vsl,settlement,receipt,xmldsig,rfc8785,sdc
+Requires-Python: >=3.10
+Description-Content-Type: text/markdown
+License-File: LICENSE
+Requires-Dist: sdcgovernance>=4.2.0
+Requires-Dist: cryptography>=42.0
+Provides-Extra: schema
+Requires-Dist: jsonschema>=4.20; extra == "schema"
+Provides-Extra: dev
+Requires-Dist: pytest>=8.0; extra == "dev"
+Requires-Dist: jsonschema>=4.20; extra == "dev"
+Dynamic: license-file
+
+# sdcreceipt
+
+Verify and settle VSL Settlement Receipts.
+
+**Verification needs no account, no network, and nothing from the issuer.**
+That is the point of the tool: a claim that anyone can check a Receipt
+independently is worth exactly as much as the ability to do it.
+
+Apache-2.0.
+
+```bash
+pip install sdcreceipt
+```
+
+## Three verbs
+
+```bash
+# Check a Receipt you were sent. Offline.
+sdcreceipt verify receipt.json --keys issuer-keys.json
+
+# Set yourself up as a party: keypair + the document to publish.
+sdcreceipt init --key-id https://vendor.example/.well-known/vsl-key.json
+
+# Authorize a settlement you are a party to.
+sdcreceipt trigger receipt.json --key vsl-party.pem \
+    --key-id https://vendor.example/.well-known/vsl-key.json
+```
+
+`verify` exits 0 only if every check passed, so it composes in a shell without
+anyone parsing output.
+
+There will not be a fourth verb. This is a client, not a product, and its
+value is in being small enough to read.
+
+---
+
+## If you were sent a Receipt
+
+You do not need an account with anyone.
+
+```bash
+pip install sdcreceipt
+curl -O https://sdcstudio.axius-sdc.com/.well-known/sdcstudio-signing-keys.json
+sdcreceipt verify receipt.json --keys sdcstudio-signing-keys.json
+```
+
+Every check is reported, not just the first failure:
+
+```
+PASS  schema: conforms
+PASS  receipt_hash: matches the canonical content
+PASS  signature[sdcstudio-signing-key-v1]: verifies over receipt_hash
+PASS  trigger[https://vendor.example/.well-known/vsl-key.json]: verifies
+PASS  settlement.complete: every listed party has triggered
+
+VERIFIED
+```
+
+A Receipt carries **hash commitments, never the payload**. So verification
+tells you a conformant, authorized, dual-triggered exchange occurred, without
+anyone having to disclose what was exchanged. If you also hold the payload or
+the governance Receipt, pass them and those get checked too:
+
+```bash
+sdcreceipt verify receipt.json --keys keys.json \
+    --payload manifest.xml --governance governance-receipt.json
+```
+
+## If you need to become a party
+
+A settlement identifies each party by a `key_id` that **you** control. That is
+deliberate: it means verifying your signature does not route through the
+issuer, so nobody has to stay alive for your old signatures to keep meaning
+something.
+
+```bash
+sdcreceipt init --key-id https://vendor.example/.well-known/vsl-key.json
+```
+
+That writes a private key (mode `0600`) and a key document, and tells you the
+exact URL the document must be reachable at. Publishing one JSON file is the
+whole onboarding requirement.
+
+Then, when you are sent a Receipt to authorize:
+
+```bash
+sdcreceipt trigger receipt.json --key vsl-party.pem --key-id <your key_id>
+```
+
+It prints a signed trigger and stops. **Signing is inert; submitting is a side
+effect**, so you send it yourself, or add `--submit <url>`.
+
+---
+
+## ★ Never take the verification key from the document
+
+> The set of keys you will accept is decided **before** you read the document,
+> and the document cannot change it.
+
+`ds:RetrievalMethod` in XML-Signature, `jku` and `x5u` in JOSE, and their
+equivalents elsewhere all say *"here is where my key lives."* That pointer was
+written by whoever produced the document, so following it asks the document to
+nominate the key that will judge it. A forged document nominates the forger's
+key and verification "succeeds."
+
+The failure is quiet. A pointer can name a domain that was correct when the
+document was signed and has since lapsed; anyone who registers it can serve a
+key at that path, and nothing about the document looks wrong — because nothing
+about it *is* wrong. The verifier was asked where to look and did as it was
+told.
+
+This tool cannot make that mistake: `verify` takes keys as arguments and has
+no code path that fetches one. That is a security property, not an
+inconvenience.
+
+The same applies to party keys, with a corollary rather than an exemption.
+Those `key_id`s *are* URIs the counterparty controls, deliberately. Resolve
+them over HTTPS only, only for identifiers already recorded in a Receipt you
+trust, and keep a copy — a party who later loses a domain must not be able to
+change what their old signatures mean.
+
+---
+
+## Conformance
+
+`tests/conformance/` ships the issuer's published vectors, and the suite runs
+this implementation against them.
+
+Ten vectors. **Every invalid one encodes a defect that was actually made**,
+not a hypothetical: a DER signature where ES256 requires P1363, a signature
+over the hex text of `receipt_hash` rather than its raw bytes, a governance
+binding that does not match the evidence held, a trigger replayed from another
+Receipt sharing the same release condition, and so on. Failing one for the
+wrong reason does not count — the manifest names the check that must break.
+
+```bash
+pytest
+```
+
+**On independence, honestly.** Passing these vectors shows this tool agrees
+with the issuer's published expectations, and that it never drifted from them.
+It is *not* an independent re-derivation: this implementation and the issuer's
+share design and history. The vectors are most valuable to someone writing a
+verifier from the specification alone, which is what they are published for.
+
+## Building your own
+
+You do not have to use this tool, and the specification does not depend on it.
+If you are writing a verifier:
+
+**Do not write a second canonicalizer.** Use `sdcgovernance` or another
+conformant RFC 8785 implementation. A second implementation can disagree with
+the first, and the disagreement is silent: the bytes differ, so the hash
+differs, and the artifact reads as tampered with rather than misencoded. This
+tool re-exports `sdcgovernance.jcs` for exactly that reason and adds nothing.
+
+**Refuse rather than guess.** Integers beyond ±(2⁵³−1) cannot round-trip
+through an IEEE 754 double, and `NaN`/`Infinity` have no JSON representation.
+Emitting something for those produces a hash that looks fine and fails only in
+someone else's verifier.
+
+**Report every check.** Stopping at the first failure hides the case that
+matters most: a Receipt whose signature verifies but whose governance binding
+does not.
+
+**Check the curve.** A signature verified against a key on an unexpected curve
+proves nothing about the party you believe signed.
+
+## Versioning
+
+MAJOR tracks the **SDC reference model**, so a `4.x.x` release targets SDC4.
+It starts at 4 rather than 0 because of that convention, not because there
+were three earlier versions. MINOR is features, PATCH is fixes. An SDC5
+reference model would make this `5.x.x`.
+
+The same scheme is used by `sdcvalidator`, `sdcgovernance` and the rest of the
+family, so a version number tells you which reference model an artifact
+targets without looking anything up.
+
+Note that the **Receipt format version is separate** and independent: a
+Receipt says `"version": "1.0"`, which is the frozen wire format, not this
+package.
+
+## Dependencies
+
+`sdcgovernance` for canonicalization and `cryptography` for ECDSA, both
+Apache-2.0-compatible libraries. `jsonschema` is optional and only needed for
+`--schema`.
+
+These are **library** dependencies. Nothing here calls a service, and
+`verify` makes no network request at all.

sdcreceipt-4.0.0/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+# sdcreceipt
+
+Verify and settle VSL Settlement Receipts.
+
+**Verification needs no account, no network, and nothing from the issuer.**
+That is the point of the tool: a claim that anyone can check a Receipt
+independently is worth exactly as much as the ability to do it.
+
+Apache-2.0.
+
+```bash
+pip install sdcreceipt
+```
+
+## Three verbs
+
+```bash
+# Check a Receipt you were sent. Offline.
+sdcreceipt verify receipt.json --keys issuer-keys.json
+
+# Set yourself up as a party: keypair + the document to publish.
+sdcreceipt init --key-id https://vendor.example/.well-known/vsl-key.json
+
+# Authorize a settlement you are a party to.
+sdcreceipt trigger receipt.json --key vsl-party.pem \
+    --key-id https://vendor.example/.well-known/vsl-key.json
+```
+
+`verify` exits 0 only if every check passed, so it composes in a shell without
+anyone parsing output.
+
+There will not be a fourth verb. This is a client, not a product, and its
+value is in being small enough to read.
+
+---
+
+## If you were sent a Receipt
+
+You do not need an account with anyone.
+
+```bash
+pip install sdcreceipt
+curl -O https://sdcstudio.axius-sdc.com/.well-known/sdcstudio-signing-keys.json
+sdcreceipt verify receipt.json --keys sdcstudio-signing-keys.json
+```
+
+Every check is reported, not just the first failure:
+
+```
+PASS  schema: conforms
+PASS  receipt_hash: matches the canonical content
+PASS  signature[sdcstudio-signing-key-v1]: verifies over receipt_hash
+PASS  trigger[https://vendor.example/.well-known/vsl-key.json]: verifies
+PASS  settlement.complete: every listed party has triggered
+
+VERIFIED
+```
+
+A Receipt carries **hash commitments, never the payload**. So verification
+tells you a conformant, authorized, dual-triggered exchange occurred, without
+anyone having to disclose what was exchanged. If you also hold the payload or
+the governance Receipt, pass them and those get checked too:
+
+```bash
+sdcreceipt verify receipt.json --keys keys.json \
+    --payload manifest.xml --governance governance-receipt.json
+```
+
+## If you need to become a party
+
+A settlement identifies each party by a `key_id` that **you** control. That is
+deliberate: it means verifying your signature does not route through the
+issuer, so nobody has to stay alive for your old signatures to keep meaning
+something.
+
+```bash
+sdcreceipt init --key-id https://vendor.example/.well-known/vsl-key.json
+```
+
+That writes a private key (mode `0600`) and a key document, and tells you the
+exact URL the document must be reachable at. Publishing one JSON file is the
+whole onboarding requirement.
+
+Then, when you are sent a Receipt to authorize:
+
+```bash
+sdcreceipt trigger receipt.json --key vsl-party.pem --key-id <your key_id>
+```
+
+It prints a signed trigger and stops. **Signing is inert; submitting is a side
+effect**, so you send it yourself, or add `--submit <url>`.
+
+---
+
+## ★ Never take the verification key from the document
+
+> The set of keys you will accept is decided **before** you read the document,
+> and the document cannot change it.
+
+`ds:RetrievalMethod` in XML-Signature, `jku` and `x5u` in JOSE, and their
+equivalents elsewhere all say *"here is where my key lives."* That pointer was
+written by whoever produced the document, so following it asks the document to
+nominate the key that will judge it. A forged document nominates the forger's
+key and verification "succeeds."
+
+The failure is quiet. A pointer can name a domain that was correct when the
+document was signed and has since lapsed; anyone who registers it can serve a
+key at that path, and nothing about the document looks wrong — because nothing
+about it *is* wrong. The verifier was asked where to look and did as it was
+told.
+
+This tool cannot make that mistake: `verify` takes keys as arguments and has
+no code path that fetches one. That is a security property, not an
+inconvenience.
+
+The same applies to party keys, with a corollary rather than an exemption.
+Those `key_id`s *are* URIs the counterparty controls, deliberately. Resolve
+them over HTTPS only, only for identifiers already recorded in a Receipt you
+trust, and keep a copy — a party who later loses a domain must not be able to
+change what their old signatures mean.
+
+---
+
+## Conformance
+
+`tests/conformance/` ships the issuer's published vectors, and the suite runs
+this implementation against them.
+
+Ten vectors. **Every invalid one encodes a defect that was actually made**,
+not a hypothetical: a DER signature where ES256 requires P1363, a signature
+over the hex text of `receipt_hash` rather than its raw bytes, a governance
+binding that does not match the evidence held, a trigger replayed from another
+Receipt sharing the same release condition, and so on. Failing one for the
+wrong reason does not count — the manifest names the check that must break.
+
+```bash
+pytest
+```
+
+**On independence, honestly.** Passing these vectors shows this tool agrees
+with the issuer's published expectations, and that it never drifted from them.
+It is *not* an independent re-derivation: this implementation and the issuer's
+share design and history. The vectors are most valuable to someone writing a
+verifier from the specification alone, which is what they are published for.
+
+## Building your own
+
+You do not have to use this tool, and the specification does not depend on it.
+If you are writing a verifier:
+
+**Do not write a second canonicalizer.** Use `sdcgovernance` or another
+conformant RFC 8785 implementation. A second implementation can disagree with
+the first, and the disagreement is silent: the bytes differ, so the hash
+differs, and the artifact reads as tampered with rather than misencoded. This
+tool re-exports `sdcgovernance.jcs` for exactly that reason and adds nothing.
+
+**Refuse rather than guess.** Integers beyond ±(2⁵³−1) cannot round-trip
+through an IEEE 754 double, and `NaN`/`Infinity` have no JSON representation.
+Emitting something for those produces a hash that looks fine and fails only in
+someone else's verifier.
+
+**Report every check.** Stopping at the first failure hides the case that
+matters most: a Receipt whose signature verifies but whose governance binding
+does not.
+
+**Check the curve.** A signature verified against a key on an unexpected curve
+proves nothing about the party you believe signed.
+
+## Versioning
+
+MAJOR tracks the **SDC reference model**, so a `4.x.x` release targets SDC4.
+It starts at 4 rather than 0 because of that convention, not because there
+were three earlier versions. MINOR is features, PATCH is fixes. An SDC5
+reference model would make this `5.x.x`.
+
+The same scheme is used by `sdcvalidator`, `sdcgovernance` and the rest of the
+family, so a version number tells you which reference model an artifact
+targets without looking anything up.
+
+Note that the **Receipt format version is separate** and independent: a
+Receipt says `"version": "1.0"`, which is the frozen wire format, not this
+package.
+
+## Dependencies
+
+`sdcgovernance` for canonicalization and `cryptography` for ECDSA, both
+Apache-2.0-compatible libraries. `jsonschema` is optional and only needed for
+`--schema`.
+
+These are **library** dependencies. Nothing here calls a service, and
+`verify` makes no network request at all.

sdcreceipt-4.0.0/pyproject.toml

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+[build-system]
+requires = ["setuptools>=68", "wheel"]
+build-backend = "setuptools.build_meta"
+
+[project]
+name = "sdcreceipt"
+version = "4.0.0"
+description = "Verify and settle VSL Settlement Receipts. No account, no network for verification."
+readme = "README.md"
+requires-python = ">=3.10"
+license = { text = "Apache-2.0" }
+authors = [{ name = "Axius SDC, Inc." }]
+keywords = ["vsl", "settlement", "receipt", "xmldsig", "rfc8785", "sdc"]
+
+dependencies = [
+    # Canonicalization, reused rather than reimplemented: a second RFC 8785
+    # implementation can disagree with the first, and the disagreement is
+    # silent. Apache-2.0, and a library dependency, not a service one.
+    "sdcgovernance>=4.2.0",
+    "cryptography>=42.0",
+]
+
+[project.optional-dependencies]
+# Schema checking is optional so `verify` works in an environment that has
+# only the crypto stack.
+schema = ["jsonschema>=4.20"]
+dev = ["pytest>=8.0", "jsonschema>=4.20"]
+
+[project.scripts]
+sdcreceipt = "sdcreceipt.cli:main"
+
+[project.urls]
+Homepage = "https://github.com/SemanticDataCharter/sdcreceipt"
+
+[tool.setuptools.packages.find]
+where = ["src"]

sdcreceipt-4.0.0/setup.cfg

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+[egg_info]
+tag_build = 
+tag_date = 0
+

sdcreceipt-4.0.0/src/sdcreceipt/__init__.py

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+#
+# Copyright (c) 2025, Axius SDC, Inc.
+# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0.
+#
+"""
+sdcreceipt - verify and settle VSL Settlement Receipts.
+
+Three verbs and no more: `verify`, `init`, `trigger`. It is a client, not a
+product; the value is in it being small enough to read.
+
+`verify` requires no network, no account, and nothing from the issuer.
+"""
+
+#: SDC ecosystem versioning: MAJOR tracks the reference model, so a 4.x.x
+#: release targets SDC4. It starts at 4 rather than 0 for that reason, not
+#: because there were three earlier versions. MINOR is features, PATCH is
+#: fixes. An SDC5 reference model would make this 5.x.x.
+__version__ = "4.0.0"
+
+from sdcreceipt.verify import Result, verify  # noqa: F401
+
+__all__ = ["verify", "Result", "__version__"]