Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update ERC-7066: Move to Last Call #47

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Nov 14, 2023

Conversation

piyush-chittara
Copy link
Contributor

When opening a pull request to submit a new EIP, please use the suggested template: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/eip-template.md

We have a GitHub bot that automatically merges some PRs. It will merge yours immediately if certain criteria are met:

  • The PR edits only existing draft PRs.
  • The build passes.
  • Your GitHub username or email address is listed in the 'author' header of all affected PRs, inside .
  • If matching on email address, the email address is the one publicly listed on your GitHub profile.

@Pandapip1
Copy link
Member

@eth-bot rerun

@eip-review-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

eip-review-bot commented Oct 27, 2023

✅ All reviewers have approved.

@eip-review-bot eip-review-bot changed the title Move to Final Update ERC-7066: Move to Final Oct 27, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@SamWilsn SamWilsn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Line 64 says:

lock function MUST revert if token is not already locked.

Emphasis mine. This seems backwards?


A bit later you write:

ERC-721 _tansfer function [...]

ERC-721 doesn't have a _tansfer function (nor _transfer), so these requirements don't make sense. You may be thinking of the OpenZeppelin implementation, which does have _transfer.

You can't depend on a specific implementation of ERC-721 in a standard, so you should reword this to be more general. Something like:

ERC-721 functions that transfer ownership of a token MUST revert [...]


Line 66's use of "setup" is a bit ambiguous. I'd recommend being more explicit.

@Joeysantoro
Copy link
Contributor

Joeysantoro commented Oct 31, 2023

In Line 64:

ERC-721 `_transfer` function MUST revert if token is locked. ERC-721 `_transfer` function MUST pass if token is locked and `msg.sender` is `approved` and `locker` both. After ERC-721 `_transfer`, values of `locker` and `approved` MUST be purged.

This is logically inconsistent and could be made clearer by saying something to the effect of:

ERC-721 `_tansfer` function MUST revert if token is locked unless `msg.sender` is both `approved` and `locker`. In the case where `msg.sender` is both approved and locker, the transfer MUST succeed and the approval and locker must be purged.

@eip-review-bot eip-review-bot changed the title Update ERC-7066: Move to Final Update ERC-7066: Move to Last Call Nov 1, 2023
@piyush-chittara
Copy link
Contributor Author

piyush-chittara commented Nov 1, 2023

Thanks a lot for the reviews @Joeysantoro @SamWilsn! :D
Your pointers are looked into and resolved.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the w-ci label Nov 1, 2023
@eip-review-bot eip-review-bot enabled auto-merge (squash) November 14, 2023 15:26
Copy link
Collaborator

@eip-review-bot eip-review-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All Reviewers Have Approved; Performing Automatic Merge...

@eip-review-bot eip-review-bot merged commit c5e4a66 into ethereum:master Nov 14, 2023
Copy link

The commit 01978d8 (as a parent of bb18f33) contains errors.
Please inspect the Run Summary for details.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants