Migration pallet #190
Migration pallet #190
Conversation
olegnn
force-pushed
the
migration-pallet
branch
from
a55ce2b to
a7f5a51
Compare
| /// Burns the free `DOCK` balance of the sender and emits an event containing the supplied recipient `cheqd` address. | ||
| /// By submitting this transaction, you agree to the Terms and Conditions. | ||
| #[pallet::weight(SubstrateWeight::<T::DbWeight>::migrate())] | ||
| pub fn migrate(origin: OriginFor<T>, cheqd_address: String) -> DispatchResultWithPostInfo { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wasn't it decided that people can migrate specified balance and not entire balance?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The last decision was to migrate the full balance.
| dock_account, | ||
| cheqd_account, | ||
| dock_tokens_amount, | ||
| accepted_terms_and_conditions: true, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Never; this fact should just be mentioned at the event.
Alternatively, we could have this flag as a transaction parameter, and only emit an event in case it was set to true.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Whats the significance then? And if its a transaction parameter, how would the transaction behave on different values of it? Isn't calling migrate implying that caller accepts the terms?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was asked to add this field by @mike-parkhill. I guess that it has a demonstrative meaning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. I still don't understand what its demonstrating.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see you're argument that we may not need it. But, it makes the acceptance explicit rather than implicit which is generally easier to defend if we ever get called on it.
Going through the migration page we're building will make it mandatory as part of the flow, but for blockchain clients who want to submit it themselves we still need to get them to show they accept the terms and conditions somehow. This was my suggestion for how to do that. I'm open to other suggestions that achieve the same thing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
With blockchain, the acceptance is always implicit, no? Eg. when you make a transfer txn, its understood that you can't ask the chain to revert that transfer. Secondly there is no way to do that txn while not accepting the terms and its not known what we would do differently if we allowed that.
Anyway, I don't think its a major problem so if it makes you feel safer or more compliant, we can go ahead with this.
| pub struct Pallet<T>(_); | ||
|
|
||
| #[pallet::call] | ||
| impl<T: Config> Pallet<T> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a need of a flag which prevents people from migrating unless we officially start the migration?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought we could publish the upgrade containing this pallet along with the migration start.
olegnn
force-pushed
the
migration-pallet
branch
from
0564293 to
46c2985
Compare
No description provided.