I see things differently. First off, I don’t think Putin directed any of the details; he was IMHO doing his customary destabilizing dance. Same as Obama did in the Israeli election. At most, Putin made a “will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest” statement, and others carried the ball forward.
If Russia was behind the hack of the DNC and Podesta, and that so far has zero proof, that was more general destabilization than any Kremlin tilt toward Trump. At that time, Trump was the longest of long shots.
Hillary was not as anti-Russian as she pretended to the electorate. When she was Sec of State, she granted serious benefits to Russian business interests, ending with Russians owning one fifth of all US uranium production, in exchange for what investigators claim exceeded a hundred million Russian dollars into the Clinton’s foundation. Whatever the exact number, it was huge. The idea that Hillary was anti-Russia and gave way a slice of US uranium to Russia is nonsense. The Clintons always did whatever best benefitted the Clintons.
I don’t think, again IMHO, that the Russian or Ukrainian governments were favoring the Democrat or the Republican so much as they had made an analytical judgement that the Democrat was most likely to win, and they were therefore playing ball with Hillary. At the time, this was the odds on favorite horse to back.
Regarding the infamous “Russian dossier”, again I doubt that was any play by the Kremlin. It was little more than a collection of anti-Trump gossip solicited and paid for by the DNC and the work of the British ex-intelligence agent Steele, and sourced to his Russian cronies. Steele delivered what the DNC asked for.