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

Add missing query to dao-pre-propose-approver #766

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Nov 16, 2023

Conversation

NoahSaso
Copy link
Member

@NoahSaso NoahSaso commented Nov 14, 2023

The dao-pre-propose-approver contract does not currently provide any query to determine which pre-propose ID corresponds with a given proposal. In other words, you cannot check which pending proposal an approval proposal was made for.

This PR adds a query PendingProposalIdForApprovalProposalId which takes the id of the approval proposal being voted on by the approval DAO and returns the id of the pending proposal in the dao-pre-propose-single contract on the DAO waiting for proposal approval.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 14, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (development@db42d45). Click here to learn what that means.

Additional details and impacted files
@@              Coverage Diff               @@
##             development     #766   +/-   ##
==============================================
  Coverage               ?   96.26%           
==============================================
  Files                  ?      203           
  Lines                  ?    50093           
  Branches               ?        0           
==============================================
  Hits                   ?    48221           
  Misses                 ?     1872           
  Partials               ?        0           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Collaborator

@bekauz bekauz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

just a few comments. not 100% sure about renaming. what do you think about returning an Option<u64> instead?

Copy link
Member

@JakeHartnell JakeHartnell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice! Agree with the comment above about may_load for the query, but otherwise LGTM.

@NoahSaso NoahSaso requested a review from bekauz November 14, 2023 19:06
Copy link
Collaborator

@bekauz bekauz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lets go!

@NoahSaso NoahSaso merged commit 690bc57 into development Nov 16, 2023
8 of 9 checks passed
@NoahSaso NoahSaso deleted the noah/missing-approver-query branch November 16, 2023 00:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants