Proposal: icrc1_minting_account endpoint

[roman-kashitsyn]

This change introduces the notion of a minting account and adds
an endpoint that returns the current minting account of the ledger.

[lastmjs]

I'm starting to think that the minting account should be an extension to ICRC-1. Not all tokens currently have a minting account, and I foresee not all tokens needing/wanting a minting account in the future.

It's a valid use-case to want a fixed supply of tokens to exist at launch.

[dansteren]

I'm starting to think that the minting account should be an extension to ICRC-1. Not all tokens currently have a minting account, and I foresee not all tokens needing/wanting a minting account in the future.

I agree with Jordan and would prefer we leave this to an extension. If however we are in the minority, I suggest we at least make the return type an opt Account to accommodate those scenarios.

[roman-kashitsyn]

I'm starting to think that the minting account should be an extension to ICRC-1. Not all tokens currently have a minting account, and I foresee not all tokens needing/wanting a minting account in the future.

It's a valid use-case to want a fixed supply of tokens to exist at launch.

That's a good point.

Maybe we could move this information into metadata?

We could add a new Value variant:

type Value = variant { ...; Principal : principal };

and return record { "icrc1:minting_account"; variant { Principal = ... } } metadata entry for ledgers that have a minting account.

[roman-kashitsyn]

The working group discussed this feature today.
The agreement is to add the icrc1_minting_account with an optional result and extend it later with the corresponding metadata entry once we define a textual representation for structured accounts.