🧾 Fix past council Total Spent #4831
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Addresses #4823
This gets rid of the funding requests which didn't execute: rejected, slashed, failed execution, etc...
It also counts a funding requests expense in the spending of the council which approved it, regardless of when the proposal execute. If the funding requests constitutionality was to be raised, the last council would be attributed the spending. Similarly proposal which are still gracing are also included to the spending (if the proposal execution fail the spending of the council which approved it would decrease).
Here's the result: https://dao-git-fix-past-council-total-spent-joystream.vercel.app/#/council/past-councils
@dmtrjsg do you know who could double check this ?