I'm supportive of having the "abort" api, I'd be less excited about opening up the constructor just because I'm not sure we want to expose ourselves to that kind of downstream support but I could definitely be convinced if we had a good use case here.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 1:37 PM Denys Kuzmenko <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you, Peter, for initiating the discussion on this topic! A dedicated > abortTransactions API sounds even better! > > It would also help if we made the BaseTransaction constructor public. > > Kind Regards, > Denys >
