-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
totalLockedValue [sic] is a fantasy number #16
Comments
because this is the place where it needs to be solved so it's an issue here. Issues should exist on the projects where they are actually solved, no backend dev gets active cause we add a comment on some market PR. This here is clearly backend, so it's also not up to So that would be another issue to create in this repo to make sure to change all those keys: https://github.com/oceanprotocol/ocean-subgraph/search?q=totalLockedValue. I would suggest creating a new issue for that instead of mixing it up with actually fixing the number. By now, we have a responsibility problem in this repo which is almost abandoned because we consider certain enterprise work to be more important given that it takes more than 25 days to approve and merge the most basic PRs: #6 |
so the fix for this was combined in #6 and not in separate PR, right? Did the rename of the key happen too? And if it was fixed in there, is it also deployed? Are we using the actual documented release process? https://github.com/oceanprotocol/ocean-subgraph#%EF%B8%8F-releases |
It includes the rename but it was not deployed yet, will check and close the issue. |
yup, know the full deployments can't be that easily automated but we should still do a release with a changelog right before doing deployment. Then it's clear to users which version of code is deployed, and what changed. Like, renaming that key is a breaking change, but there's not even a commit message for it. Using PRs and |
This query returns as
totalLockedValue
:which would be converted:
We do not have 287 Million Euro locked in our pools. So it's completely wrong.
(And it should be
totalValueLocked
nottotalLockedValue
. Already commented in the PR)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: